John McCormick
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- September 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199556212
- eISBN:
- 9780191721830
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199556212.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, European Union, International Relations and Politics
This book attempts to identify and outline the political, economic, and social norms and values associated with Europe and Europeans. It argues that regardless of the doubts associated with the ...
More
This book attempts to identify and outline the political, economic, and social norms and values associated with Europe and Europeans. It argues that regardless of the doubts associated with the exercise of European integration and the work of the European Union, and regardless of residual identities with states and nations, Europeans have much in common. The opening chapters deal with the historical development of European ideas, and are followed by chapters addressing European attitudes towards the state (including a rejection of state‐based nationalism, new ideas about patriotism and citizenship, and the importance of cosmopolitanism), the characteristics of politics and government in Europe (with an emphasis on communitarianism and the effects of the parliamentary system of government), European economic models (including the importance of welfarism and sustainable development), European social models, European attitudes towards values such as multiculturalism and secularism, and Europeanist views in regard to international relations (emphasizing civilian power and multiculturalism).Less
This book attempts to identify and outline the political, economic, and social norms and values associated with Europe and Europeans. It argues that regardless of the doubts associated with the exercise of European integration and the work of the European Union, and regardless of residual identities with states and nations, Europeans have much in common. The opening chapters deal with the historical development of European ideas, and are followed by chapters addressing European attitudes towards the state (including a rejection of state‐based nationalism, new ideas about patriotism and citizenship, and the importance of cosmopolitanism), the characteristics of politics and government in Europe (with an emphasis on communitarianism and the effects of the parliamentary system of government), European economic models (including the importance of welfarism and sustainable development), European social models, European attitudes towards values such as multiculturalism and secularism, and Europeanist views in regard to international relations (emphasizing civilian power and multiculturalism).
David M. Malone
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199278572
- eISBN:
- 9780191604119
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199278571.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This introductory chapter begins with a brief description of the UN Security Council’s involvement in Iraq. It then provides background information on the Iraqi state, Saddam Hussein, the mood in the ...
More
This introductory chapter begins with a brief description of the UN Security Council’s involvement in Iraq. It then provides background information on the Iraqi state, Saddam Hussein, the mood in the UN Security Council, post-Cold War US multilateralism, and the split between the P-5 (Permanent Five members of the Security Council). An overview of the chapters included in this volume is presented.Less
This introductory chapter begins with a brief description of the UN Security Council’s involvement in Iraq. It then provides background information on the Iraqi state, Saddam Hussein, the mood in the UN Security Council, post-Cold War US multilateralism, and the split between the P-5 (Permanent Five members of the Security Council). An overview of the chapters included in this volume is presented.
David M. Malone
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199278572
- eISBN:
- 9780191604119
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199278571.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter focuses on the instrumental approach of all five permanent members to the Council as a resource for their own purposes, in effect their instrumental multilateralism. It addresses ...
More
This chapter focuses on the instrumental approach of all five permanent members to the Council as a resource for their own purposes, in effect their instrumental multilateralism. It addresses conceptions of legality, legitimacy, representation, and democracy in the Council, seeking to draw lessons from the Council’s drift into decision-making in a legal-regulatory (rather than politico-military) mode, not least with respect to accountability. It also examines some of the challenges the UN and its Member States face when attempting peacebuilding, perhaps better thought of as (responsible) state-building.Less
This chapter focuses on the instrumental approach of all five permanent members to the Council as a resource for their own purposes, in effect their instrumental multilateralism. It addresses conceptions of legality, legitimacy, representation, and democracy in the Council, seeking to draw lessons from the Council’s drift into decision-making in a legal-regulatory (rather than politico-military) mode, not least with respect to accountability. It also examines some of the challenges the UN and its Member States face when attempting peacebuilding, perhaps better thought of as (responsible) state-building.
Stephen Hopgood
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199261437
- eISBN:
- 9780191599309
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199261431.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Presents an analysis of multilateralism in American foreign environmental policy, focusing on the issues of ozone depletion, climate change, and biodiversity, and arguing that the evolution of US ...
More
Presents an analysis of multilateralism in American foreign environmental policy, focusing on the issues of ozone depletion, climate change, and biodiversity, and arguing that the evolution of US perspectives on environmental multilateralism reflects a fundamental split in the US policy arena. On one side are activists who seek to promote multilateral regulation of environmental issues and to deepen the US role therein. On the other hand are the sceptics, hostile to state and international regulation of environmental issues and preferring market solutions. The author suggests that, although sceptics have scored repeated short‐term successes, the longer‐term momentum favours the activists, and the US is gradually becoming more deeply embedded in multilateral environmental regimes.Less
Presents an analysis of multilateralism in American foreign environmental policy, focusing on the issues of ozone depletion, climate change, and biodiversity, and arguing that the evolution of US perspectives on environmental multilateralism reflects a fundamental split in the US policy arena. On one side are activists who seek to promote multilateral regulation of environmental issues and to deepen the US role therein. On the other hand are the sceptics, hostile to state and international regulation of environmental issues and preferring market solutions. The author suggests that, although sceptics have scored repeated short‐term successes, the longer‐term momentum favours the activists, and the US is gradually becoming more deeply embedded in multilateral environmental regimes.
Ralph A. Cossa
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199261437
- eISBN:
- 9780191599309
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199261431.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
An examination is made of US policy towards and participation in several key regional multilateral organizations in the Asia–Pacific area, with the aim of establishing how central these organizations ...
More
An examination is made of US policy towards and participation in several key regional multilateral organizations in the Asia–Pacific area, with the aim of establishing how central these organizations are to the overall development of US policy and the extent to which, and how, they influence or constrain US behaviour. The first section of the chapter reviews US strategic goals and briefly discusses some of the domestic and external factors that have led to the development and implementation of these goals in East Asia. The next section discusses multilateral security cooperation in the region, and gives an overview of regional multilateral security organizations, focusing primarily on the ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Regional Forum (ARF), given its all‐encompassing nature and relatively advanced (by Asian standards) stage of development; other US‐instigated multilateral institutions and initiatives (the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), and the Northeast Asia Cooperation Dialogue (NEACD) are touched upon briefly to assess how these more narrowly focused approaches also serve American interests. The third section looks at Asia–Pacific multilateral economic cooperation, and here the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) provides the centrepiece of the discussion; its role both in creating an Asia–Pacific economic community and, more recently, as a vehicle for political cooperation through the institutionalization of the US‐instigated Leaders’ Meetings, which bring many of the region's heads of state and government together annually, ostensibly for economic discussions. The conclusion to the chapter briefly evaluates the advantages and disadvantages of these organizations from a US perspective in order to understand better how security and economic multilateralism fits with the largely bilaterally oriented US national security strategy.Less
An examination is made of US policy towards and participation in several key regional multilateral organizations in the Asia–Pacific area, with the aim of establishing how central these organizations are to the overall development of US policy and the extent to which, and how, they influence or constrain US behaviour. The first section of the chapter reviews US strategic goals and briefly discusses some of the domestic and external factors that have led to the development and implementation of these goals in East Asia. The next section discusses multilateral security cooperation in the region, and gives an overview of regional multilateral security organizations, focusing primarily on the ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Regional Forum (ARF), given its all‐encompassing nature and relatively advanced (by Asian standards) stage of development; other US‐instigated multilateral institutions and initiatives (the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), and the Northeast Asia Cooperation Dialogue (NEACD) are touched upon briefly to assess how these more narrowly focused approaches also serve American interests. The third section looks at Asia–Pacific multilateral economic cooperation, and here the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) provides the centrepiece of the discussion; its role both in creating an Asia–Pacific economic community and, more recently, as a vehicle for political cooperation through the institutionalization of the US‐instigated Leaders’ Meetings, which bring many of the region's heads of state and government together annually, ostensibly for economic discussions. The conclusion to the chapter briefly evaluates the advantages and disadvantages of these organizations from a US perspective in order to understand better how security and economic multilateralism fits with the largely bilaterally oriented US national security strategy.
Tom Farer
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199534722
- eISBN:
- 9780191715891
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199534722.001.0001
- Subject:
- Law, Human Rights and Immigration, Public International Law
This book brings together and subjects to critical scrutiny the core controversies connected to the so-called ‘War on Terror’: When is it legitimate and prudent to use force? Is torture ever ...
More
This book brings together and subjects to critical scrutiny the core controversies connected to the so-called ‘War on Terror’: When is it legitimate and prudent to use force? Is torture ever justified? Do we need to suspend human rights in order to fight terrorism? Is multi-culturalism the answer to communal conflict? Is Israel's treatment of the Palestinians illegal and immoral, an accelerator of terrorism, or legitimately defensive and largely irrelevant to the terrorism problem? Are terrorists responding to concrete U.S. policies or do they simply hate and wish to destroy Western societies? Liberal intellectuals and political leaders have been slow to articulate a grand strategy informed by liberal values for confronting these issues surrounding global terrorism. This book outlines the framework of a liberal strategy providing ideas and actions. It also gives clear and concise definitions of key terms in current foreign policy discussions, including liberalism, human rights, neo-conservatism, multilateralism and terrorism. This book exposes the costs of the neo-conservative alternative that has driven US foreign policy since 9/11.Less
This book brings together and subjects to critical scrutiny the core controversies connected to the so-called ‘War on Terror’: When is it legitimate and prudent to use force? Is torture ever justified? Do we need to suspend human rights in order to fight terrorism? Is multi-culturalism the answer to communal conflict? Is Israel's treatment of the Palestinians illegal and immoral, an accelerator of terrorism, or legitimately defensive and largely irrelevant to the terrorism problem? Are terrorists responding to concrete U.S. policies or do they simply hate and wish to destroy Western societies? Liberal intellectuals and political leaders have been slow to articulate a grand strategy informed by liberal values for confronting these issues surrounding global terrorism. This book outlines the framework of a liberal strategy providing ideas and actions. It also gives clear and concise definitions of key terms in current foreign policy discussions, including liberalism, human rights, neo-conservatism, multilateralism and terrorism. This book exposes the costs of the neo-conservative alternative that has driven US foreign policy since 9/11.
G. John Ikenberry
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199552030
- eISBN:
- 9780191720291
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552030.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics, European Union
This chapter contends that, in a world where the West stands truly triumphant, a fundamental debate has broken out within its ranks about unilateralism versus multilateralism. The Bush administration ...
More
This chapter contends that, in a world where the West stands truly triumphant, a fundamental debate has broken out within its ranks about unilateralism versus multilateralism. The Bush administration is not simply more unilateral than previous American administrations; under Bush, America has seemingly forfeited its leadership position as the steward of the rules and institutions of governance. “Europeans want more liberal global governance while the United States seems to want less—perhaps none.” This is at the heart of the difficulties today. Still, the chapter is optimistic about the future of the Atlantic relationship. No country can solve the world's problems alone. Ultimately even the United States will have to recognize that some form of multilateralism is necessary, although it may not necessarily be the variant espoused by the Europeans today.Less
This chapter contends that, in a world where the West stands truly triumphant, a fundamental debate has broken out within its ranks about unilateralism versus multilateralism. The Bush administration is not simply more unilateral than previous American administrations; under Bush, America has seemingly forfeited its leadership position as the steward of the rules and institutions of governance. “Europeans want more liberal global governance while the United States seems to want less—perhaps none.” This is at the heart of the difficulties today. Still, the chapter is optimistic about the future of the Atlantic relationship. No country can solve the world's problems alone. Ultimately even the United States will have to recognize that some form of multilateralism is necessary, although it may not necessarily be the variant espoused by the Europeans today.
Philip Nel
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199261437
- eISBN:
- 9780191599309
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199261431.003.0008
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
The purpose is to trace and assess the ways in which the US has used multilateral institutions/organizations (both those international institutions/organizations of which it is a member and those ...
More
The purpose is to trace and assess the ways in which the US has used multilateral institutions/organizations (both those international institutions/organizations of which it is a member and those regional institutions/organizations of which it is not) and multilateralism itself to pursue its interests on the African continent. The emergence of a noticeable multilateral dimension to American policy towards Africa is situated against two backgrounds: the first (Sect. 1 of the chapter) deals with the general features of American policy towards Africa since the Second World War and the role that multilateralism in general has played in that; the second (Sect. 2) deals with the rise of multilateralism (and multilateral regional institutions/organizations) on the African continent as a process that has a dynamic of its own. This perspective on Africa as an agent, and not simply as an object, of US policy is important for maintaining a critical perspective on the successes but also the contradictions and failures of US policy towards Africa. The final two sections offer a detailed description and evaluation of the dimensions of multilateralism in post‐cold‐war US policy, and, in particular, the Clinton era, which, in many respects, encapsulates much of what is right and wrong with US policy towards the continent. The evaluation made and the general assumptions used to approach the theme of US policy towards Africa are informed by a broadly neo‐Gramscian appraisal of the hegemonic function of the US in the current global political and economic order, and of the place of multilateralism within that hegemonic function.Less
The purpose is to trace and assess the ways in which the US has used multilateral institutions/organizations (both those international institutions/organizations of which it is a member and those regional institutions/organizations of which it is not) and multilateralism itself to pursue its interests on the African continent. The emergence of a noticeable multilateral dimension to American policy towards Africa is situated against two backgrounds: the first (Sect. 1 of the chapter) deals with the general features of American policy towards Africa since the Second World War and the role that multilateralism in general has played in that; the second (Sect. 2) deals with the rise of multilateralism (and multilateral regional institutions/organizations) on the African continent as a process that has a dynamic of its own. This perspective on Africa as an agent, and not simply as an object, of US policy is important for maintaining a critical perspective on the successes but also the contradictions and failures of US policy towards Africa. The final two sections offer a detailed description and evaluation of the dimensions of multilateralism in post‐cold‐war US policy, and, in particular, the Clinton era, which, in many respects, encapsulates much of what is right and wrong with US policy towards the continent. The evaluation made and the general assumptions used to approach the theme of US policy towards Africa are informed by a broadly neo‐Gramscian appraisal of the hegemonic function of the US in the current global political and economic order, and of the place of multilateralism within that hegemonic function.
David G. Haglund
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199261437
- eISBN:
- 9780191599309
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199261431.003.0010
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Takes up the relationship between the US and regional multilateral organizations in Europe, in particular, NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), and the European Union (specifically the ...
More
Takes up the relationship between the US and regional multilateral organizations in Europe, in particular, NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), and the European Union (specifically the common European security and defence policy, or ESDP). It is suggested that US relations with Europe are an indicator of the US commitment to multilateralism more generally, and argued that the US approach to NATO has been driven by a combination of international structural factors (the distribution of capabilities) and the key domestic factor of national character (the liberal identity of the US). These very same factors hold important consequences for NATO because the US is the decisive actor in NATO, which, as a political entity, reflects the multilateralism that has its foundations in US national character, but as a military instrument, reflects the dominant power of the US. The resulting tensions in NATO were finessed more easily during the cold war, in the face of a common enemy, but are more significant in the current unipolar system, which exaggerates both the incentives for the US to act unilaterally and the frustration of European states who are less able to constrain the US yet unwilling to act independently. The author expects NATO to become less rather than more important to the US in the years ahead, and thus to matter less as a multilateral organization. The different sections of the chapter are: Isolationism as Multilateralism's ‘Other’?; Sources of America's Eurocentric Multilateralism; Systemic Change and American Behaviour: The Case of NATO; Consequences for Multilateral Organizations: The EU and the ESDP; and The Bush Administration and the European Allies.Less
Takes up the relationship between the US and regional multilateral organizations in Europe, in particular, NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), and the European Union (specifically the common European security and defence policy, or ESDP). It is suggested that US relations with Europe are an indicator of the US commitment to multilateralism more generally, and argued that the US approach to NATO has been driven by a combination of international structural factors (the distribution of capabilities) and the key domestic factor of national character (the liberal identity of the US). These very same factors hold important consequences for NATO because the US is the decisive actor in NATO, which, as a political entity, reflects the multilateralism that has its foundations in US national character, but as a military instrument, reflects the dominant power of the US. The resulting tensions in NATO were finessed more easily during the cold war, in the face of a common enemy, but are more significant in the current unipolar system, which exaggerates both the incentives for the US to act unilaterally and the frustration of European states who are less able to constrain the US yet unwilling to act independently. The author expects NATO to become less rather than more important to the US in the years ahead, and thus to matter less as a multilateral organization. The different sections of the chapter are: Isolationism as Multilateralism's ‘Other’?; Sources of America's Eurocentric Multilateralism; Systemic Change and American Behaviour: The Case of NATO; Consequences for Multilateral Organizations: The EU and the ESDP; and The Bush Administration and the European Allies.
Arthur C. Helton
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199250318
- eISBN:
- 9780191599477
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199250316.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
As evidenced in US government responses to humanitarian emergencies over the past decade, humanitarian considerations are often not taken into account sufficiently in military and political planning ...
More
As evidenced in US government responses to humanitarian emergencies over the past decade, humanitarian considerations are often not taken into account sufficiently in military and political planning processes. Kosovo was a prime example. The status quo is not an optimal basis for promoting US humanitarian interests. Bureaucratic turf wars and a long‐standing debate between the developed and developing countries on questions of intervention and national sovereignty have politicized and slowed effective humanitarian action, causing donor countries to turn away from formal multi‐lateral structures. To more effectively discharge US government functions in the humanitarian field and to more effectively coordinate policy, a new separate civilian agency —an Agency for Humanitarian Action (AHA)—is proposed.Less
As evidenced in US government responses to humanitarian emergencies over the past decade, humanitarian considerations are often not taken into account sufficiently in military and political planning processes. Kosovo was a prime example. The status quo is not an optimal basis for promoting US humanitarian interests. Bureaucratic turf wars and a long‐standing debate between the developed and developing countries on questions of intervention and national sovereignty have politicized and slowed effective humanitarian action, causing donor countries to turn away from formal multi‐lateral structures. To more effectively discharge US government functions in the humanitarian field and to more effectively coordinate policy, a new separate civilian agency —an Agency for Humanitarian Action (AHA)—is proposed.
Caroline Fehl
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199608621
- eISBN:
- 9780191731730
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608621.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This book addresses a striking puzzle in contemporary world politics: Why have European states responded in varying ways to unilateralist tendencies in US foreign policy? The United States played a ...
More
This book addresses a striking puzzle in contemporary world politics: Why have European states responded in varying ways to unilateralist tendencies in US foreign policy? The United States played a hegemonic leadership role in building the post‐war multilateral order, but has been reluctant to embrace many recent multilateral treaty initiatives championed by its traditional European allies, such as the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, the International Criminal Court, or the verification protocol to the Biological Weapons Convention. European responses to US objections, however, have varied across these different transatlantic controversies. In some cases, European decision‐makers watered down or abandoned contested treaties, whereas in others, they opted for regime‐building excluding the US, that is, for a strategy of non‐hegemonic cooperation. How Europeans choose to deal with the ‘reluctant hegemon’ has critical implications for how key global challenges are addressed—yet, the variation of their responses has been largely overlooked in a scholarly debate fixated on understanding US policy. This book fills this important gap by studying European strategic choices in five recent transatlantic conflicts over multilateral agreements. It argues that neither realist accounts of global power dynamics nor rational institutionalist models of cooperation can fully explain why Europeans opt for non‐hegemonic cooperation in some cases but not others. To resolve this puzzle, we need to combine rationalist propositions with constructivist insights about normative constraints on states’ institutional choices. By developing such an integrated model, the book sheds new light on the long‐standing theoretical debate about the relationship between hegemony and international cooperation.Less
This book addresses a striking puzzle in contemporary world politics: Why have European states responded in varying ways to unilateralist tendencies in US foreign policy? The United States played a hegemonic leadership role in building the post‐war multilateral order, but has been reluctant to embrace many recent multilateral treaty initiatives championed by its traditional European allies, such as the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, the International Criminal Court, or the verification protocol to the Biological Weapons Convention. European responses to US objections, however, have varied across these different transatlantic controversies. In some cases, European decision‐makers watered down or abandoned contested treaties, whereas in others, they opted for regime‐building excluding the US, that is, for a strategy of non‐hegemonic cooperation. How Europeans choose to deal with the ‘reluctant hegemon’ has critical implications for how key global challenges are addressed—yet, the variation of their responses has been largely overlooked in a scholarly debate fixated on understanding US policy. This book fills this important gap by studying European strategic choices in five recent transatlantic conflicts over multilateral agreements. It argues that neither realist accounts of global power dynamics nor rational institutionalist models of cooperation can fully explain why Europeans opt for non‐hegemonic cooperation in some cases but not others. To resolve this puzzle, we need to combine rationalist propositions with constructivist insights about normative constraints on states’ institutional choices. By developing such an integrated model, the book sheds new light on the long‐standing theoretical debate about the relationship between hegemony and international cooperation.
Sarah E. Kreps
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199753796
- eISBN:
- 9780199827152
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753796.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
When the Clinton Administration sent the United States military into Haiti in 1994, it first sought United Nations authorization and assembled a large coalition of allies. With a defense budget ...
More
When the Clinton Administration sent the United States military into Haiti in 1994, it first sought United Nations authorization and assembled a large coalition of allies. With a defense budget twenty times the entire GDP of Haiti, why did the US seek multilateral support when its military could quickly and easily have overpowered the 7,600-soldier Haitian army? The US has enjoyed unrivaled military power after the Cold War and yet in eight out of ten post-Cold War military interventions, it has chosen to use force multilaterally rather than going alone. Why does the US seek allies when, as the case of Haiti so starkly illustrates, it does not appear to need their help? Why in other instances such as the 2003 Iraq War does it largely sidestep international institutions and allies and intervene unilaterally? This book answers these questions through a study of US interventions after the post-Cold War. It shows that even powerful states have incentives to intervene multilaterally. Coalitions and international organization blessing confer legitimacy and provide ways to share what are often costly burdens of war. But those benefits come at some cost, since multilateralism is less expedient than unilateralism. With long time horizons—in which threats are distant—states will welcome the material assistance and legitimacy benefits of multilateralism. Short time horizons, however, will make immediate payoffs of unilateralism more attractive, even if it means foregoing the longer-term benefits of multilateralism.Less
When the Clinton Administration sent the United States military into Haiti in 1994, it first sought United Nations authorization and assembled a large coalition of allies. With a defense budget twenty times the entire GDP of Haiti, why did the US seek multilateral support when its military could quickly and easily have overpowered the 7,600-soldier Haitian army? The US has enjoyed unrivaled military power after the Cold War and yet in eight out of ten post-Cold War military interventions, it has chosen to use force multilaterally rather than going alone. Why does the US seek allies when, as the case of Haiti so starkly illustrates, it does not appear to need their help? Why in other instances such as the 2003 Iraq War does it largely sidestep international institutions and allies and intervene unilaterally? This book answers these questions through a study of US interventions after the post-Cold War. It shows that even powerful states have incentives to intervene multilaterally. Coalitions and international organization blessing confer legitimacy and provide ways to share what are often costly burdens of war. But those benefits come at some cost, since multilateralism is less expedient than unilateralism. With long time horizons—in which threats are distant—states will welcome the material assistance and legitimacy benefits of multilateralism. Short time horizons, however, will make immediate payoffs of unilateralism more attractive, even if it means foregoing the longer-term benefits of multilateralism.
DAVID SCOTT
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780197264089
- eISBN:
- 9780191734809
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- British Academy
- DOI:
- 10.5871/bacad/9780197264089.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
By examining the strategic dialogue process, this chapter conducts a wider evaluation across time and the issue areas of the relationship. It provides a careful textual analysis of the discourse ...
More
By examining the strategic dialogue process, this chapter conducts a wider evaluation across time and the issue areas of the relationship. It provides a careful textual analysis of the discourse mechanisms that Europe and China are using to develop their political language; but it also points to the gaps, inconsistencies, and slippages between what is being said and what is being understood. The discussion considers the emergent actors to be seeking pathways in a fluid international environment, in which they sometimes seem to be on parallel paths, at other times on divergent ones, with the result that it cannot easily be deduced at this stage whether these pathways will lead to a common end destination or not. Still, if liberalism-functionalism has any credence, then EU multilateralism may also be encouraging similar multilateralism trends in China.Less
By examining the strategic dialogue process, this chapter conducts a wider evaluation across time and the issue areas of the relationship. It provides a careful textual analysis of the discourse mechanisms that Europe and China are using to develop their political language; but it also points to the gaps, inconsistencies, and slippages between what is being said and what is being understood. The discussion considers the emergent actors to be seeking pathways in a fluid international environment, in which they sometimes seem to be on parallel paths, at other times on divergent ones, with the result that it cannot easily be deduced at this stage whether these pathways will lead to a common end destination or not. Still, if liberalism-functionalism has any credence, then EU multilateralism may also be encouraging similar multilateralism trends in China.
LISELOTTE ODGAARD and SVEN BISCOP
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780197264089
- eISBN:
- 9780191734809
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- British Academy
- DOI:
- 10.5871/bacad/9780197264089.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter considers the EU's ambition to enmesh China in a system of effective multilateralism in pursuit of global public goods. It notes that China's position on both multilateralism and ...
More
This chapter considers the EU's ambition to enmesh China in a system of effective multilateralism in pursuit of global public goods. It notes that China's position on both multilateralism and universal goods to be contingent: China favours these engagements and goals to the extent that they restrain and commit others, but is much more conservative if they require restraint or commitment on its own part. China's reservations derive mostly from the behaviour of the United States: if the world's predominant military and economic power is a contingent multilateralist, can the rising power of China do otherwise? Until there is more evidence to the contrary, this chapter concludes that China's commitment to multilateralism cannot form a ‘reliable basis for long-term EU policy planning towards China’.Less
This chapter considers the EU's ambition to enmesh China in a system of effective multilateralism in pursuit of global public goods. It notes that China's position on both multilateralism and universal goods to be contingent: China favours these engagements and goals to the extent that they restrain and commit others, but is much more conservative if they require restraint or commitment on its own part. China's reservations derive mostly from the behaviour of the United States: if the world's predominant military and economic power is a contingent multilateralist, can the rising power of China do otherwise? Until there is more evidence to the contrary, this chapter concludes that China's commitment to multilateralism cannot form a ‘reliable basis for long-term EU policy planning towards China’.
ZHANG LINHONG
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780197264089
- eISBN:
- 9780191734809
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- British Academy
- DOI:
- 10.5871/bacad/9780197264089.003.0011
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter presents a view of China's approach to security multilateralism in Pacific Asia. It argues that the three main challenges that China faces in regional security are the potential for ...
More
This chapter presents a view of China's approach to security multilateralism in Pacific Asia. It argues that the three main challenges that China faces in regional security are the potential for conflict on the Korean peninsula, Japan's politics of military aggressiveness and the meaninglessness of its non-violent constitution, and the Taiwan separatists' denial of ‘One China’. Despite the likely persistence of these problems, the discussion presents some grounds for optimism in building regional security multilateralism, in terms of the modes, fields, and driving forces of cooperation. Nevertheless, it indicates how far the prospect for multilateralism is dependent on the emergence of a consensus between China, Japan, and the USA as to its desirability, capability, and purposes.Less
This chapter presents a view of China's approach to security multilateralism in Pacific Asia. It argues that the three main challenges that China faces in regional security are the potential for conflict on the Korean peninsula, Japan's politics of military aggressiveness and the meaninglessness of its non-violent constitution, and the Taiwan separatists' denial of ‘One China’. Despite the likely persistence of these problems, the discussion presents some grounds for optimism in building regional security multilateralism, in terms of the modes, fields, and driving forces of cooperation. Nevertheless, it indicates how far the prospect for multilateralism is dependent on the emergence of a consensus between China, Japan, and the USA as to its desirability, capability, and purposes.
Sarah E. Kreps
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199753796
- eISBN:
- 9780199827152
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753796.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This introductory chapter sets out the purpose of the book, which is to examine why powerful states such as the United States intervene multilaterally more often than not. When does the United States ...
More
This introductory chapter sets out the purpose of the book, which is to examine why powerful states such as the United States intervene multilaterally more often than not. When does the United States instead sidestep multilateral channels and intervene alone? When it sticks with multilateralism, how does it choose from the menu of multilateral institutions, whether a formal institution such as the United Nations (UN), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), or an informal coalition of the willing? To answer those questions, this book looks at instances of American military intervention after the Cold War. The combination of theoretical and empirical analysis shows why multilateralism often prevails even for the one player on the field that counts. It clarifies why unilateralism is desirable in some cases but why these are exceptions. Finally, it spells out why multilateralism can take many forms and how lead states choose among them. An overview of the subsequent chapters is presented.Less
This introductory chapter sets out the purpose of the book, which is to examine why powerful states such as the United States intervene multilaterally more often than not. When does the United States instead sidestep multilateral channels and intervene alone? When it sticks with multilateralism, how does it choose from the menu of multilateral institutions, whether a formal institution such as the United Nations (UN), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), or an informal coalition of the willing? To answer those questions, this book looks at instances of American military intervention after the Cold War. The combination of theoretical and empirical analysis shows why multilateralism often prevails even for the one player on the field that counts. It clarifies why unilateralism is desirable in some cases but why these are exceptions. Finally, it spells out why multilateralism can take many forms and how lead states choose among them. An overview of the subsequent chapters is presented.
Sarah E. Kreps
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199753796
- eISBN:
- 9780199827152
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753796.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This research turns on concepts that are central to international politics—polarity, intervention, cooperation—but ones that remain loosely defined in the literature. This chapter addresses the ...
More
This research turns on concepts that are central to international politics—polarity, intervention, cooperation—but ones that remain loosely defined in the literature. This chapter addresses the following questions: What does unipolarity mean, and why does the distribution of power matter? What is an intervention? When does a particular use of force constitute an intervention? How do we know whether a particular coalition is multilateral or whether it is stacked with states that provide more window dressing than any real decision-making influence?Less
This research turns on concepts that are central to international politics—polarity, intervention, cooperation—but ones that remain loosely defined in the literature. This chapter addresses the following questions: What does unipolarity mean, and why does the distribution of power matter? What is an intervention? When does a particular use of force constitute an intervention? How do we know whether a particular coalition is multilateral or whether it is stacked with states that provide more window dressing than any real decision-making influence?
Sarah E. Kreps
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199753796
- eISBN:
- 9780199827152
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753796.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter examines the 1991 Gulf War because it was unusually multilateral. This case of multilateralism is an exemplar for the conditions particularly suited to multilateralism; it provides a ...
More
This chapter examines the 1991 Gulf War because it was unusually multilateral. This case of multilateralism is an exemplar for the conditions particularly suited to multilateralism; it provides a heuristic for understanding when multilateralism is more likely. The Gulf War coalition has been called “a monument to multilateralism”. The size and diversity of the coalition that intervened to expel Iraq from Kuwait was extraordinary. Among the participants were NATO countries, former members of the moribund Warsaw Pact, states from the Non-Aligned Movement, historically neutral countries such as Sweden, and states with enduring rivalries such as Greece and Turkey. This constellation of former foes, large powers and small states, and democracies and autocracies seemed to be a refreshing reminder that perhaps the Cold War alignment was a thing of the past.Less
This chapter examines the 1991 Gulf War because it was unusually multilateral. This case of multilateralism is an exemplar for the conditions particularly suited to multilateralism; it provides a heuristic for understanding when multilateralism is more likely. The Gulf War coalition has been called “a monument to multilateralism”. The size and diversity of the coalition that intervened to expel Iraq from Kuwait was extraordinary. Among the participants were NATO countries, former members of the moribund Warsaw Pact, states from the Non-Aligned Movement, historically neutral countries such as Sweden, and states with enduring rivalries such as Greece and Turkey. This constellation of former foes, large powers and small states, and democracies and autocracies seemed to be a refreshing reminder that perhaps the Cold War alignment was a thing of the past.
Sarah E. Kreps
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199753796
- eISBN:
- 9780199827152
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753796.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter examines the multilateral 1994 Haiti intervention, an unlikely case of multilateralism for both the operational commitment and regional power explanations. The vast power disparities ...
More
This chapter examines the multilateral 1994 Haiti intervention, an unlikely case of multilateralism for both the operational commitment and regional power explanations. The vast power disparities between the US and Haitian militaries and the absence of regional powers should have meant an interest in minimal multilateralism; the UN-authorized intervention and allied support challenge these explanations.Less
This chapter examines the multilateral 1994 Haiti intervention, an unlikely case of multilateralism for both the operational commitment and regional power explanations. The vast power disparities between the US and Haitian militaries and the absence of regional powers should have meant an interest in minimal multilateralism; the UN-authorized intervention and allied support challenge these explanations.
Sarah E. Kreps
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199753796
- eISBN:
- 9780199827152
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753796.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter begins by discussing the US military response to 9/11, tracing how the United States largely eschewed offers of allied assistance and intervened in Afghanistan with limited support from ...
More
This chapter begins by discussing the US military response to 9/11, tracing how the United States largely eschewed offers of allied assistance and intervened in Afghanistan with limited support from the British and the Northern Alliance. It then suggests that the short time horizon after 9/11 and faith in what became known as the Afghan Model—reliance on small numbers of special operations forces (SOF) instead of large numbers of conventional forces—made allied support seem both unnecessary and potentially counterproductive. Longer time horizons that followed the fall of the Taliban coupled with the realization that postconflict operations would be lengthy and costly produced the multilateral strategy that later incorporated international institutions and a number of allies that had offered to contribute at the outset. Norms and domestic politics had little effect on the cooperation strategy, the former because norms were relegated to a distant second priority behind effectiveness after 9/11, and the latter because both the public and Congress wrote the president a blank check for the post-9/11 response. The Afghanistan case study finally turns to the regional power argument, which finds support from US actions to obtain logistics support from states in the region whose assistance was imperative and whose interference would have created prohibitive obstacles.Less
This chapter begins by discussing the US military response to 9/11, tracing how the United States largely eschewed offers of allied assistance and intervened in Afghanistan with limited support from the British and the Northern Alliance. It then suggests that the short time horizon after 9/11 and faith in what became known as the Afghan Model—reliance on small numbers of special operations forces (SOF) instead of large numbers of conventional forces—made allied support seem both unnecessary and potentially counterproductive. Longer time horizons that followed the fall of the Taliban coupled with the realization that postconflict operations would be lengthy and costly produced the multilateral strategy that later incorporated international institutions and a number of allies that had offered to contribute at the outset. Norms and domestic politics had little effect on the cooperation strategy, the former because norms were relegated to a distant second priority behind effectiveness after 9/11, and the latter because both the public and Congress wrote the president a blank check for the post-9/11 response. The Afghanistan case study finally turns to the regional power argument, which finds support from US actions to obtain logistics support from states in the region whose assistance was imperative and whose interference would have created prohibitive obstacles.
