How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Barry Rubin has an excellent--which these days means completely depressing--piece on his site about the Victoria, a Liberian-flagged ship that was recently stuffed with weapons in Latakia and intercepted by the IDF en route to Gaza.
A paragraph of the article stood out to me as debatable (sadly, only one):
Events in Egypt teach us once again that while countries pursue their national interests it is up to governments to define those interests. The previous sentence is the key to international affairs. It provides all the international relations and political science theory you will ever need. A new regime--as we saw with the overthrow of the shah and his replacement by Islamists in Iran--has a new view of national interests.
I don't have a huge amount of time for international relations and political science theory--a lot of useless words out there, for sure--but I suspect you need a bit more than that.
But I'm open-minded. I'll throw all the theory books in the trash heap if ever a government comes to power in Russia and declares, "To heck with warm water ports."
- Comment (14)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments:
Feb '11
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
But the actions of the government are influenced and often constrained by powerful interest groups in the society, whose longevity may well exceed that of the government, as well as by economic and geographical factors.
There's an analogy with business-to-business selling, where the sale is often influenced by multiple decision-makers within the client corporation, some of whom may indeed be unknown to the person doing the selling. If your prospect company get a new CEO, that obviously matters, but it probably doesn't mean that your contacts in Purchasing, Legal, and whatever department is going to use your product have suddenly become irrelevant.
Jack Welch once gave a talk on "the benefits of low-level selling" as a corrective to the idea that executives and salespeople should focus exclusively on the highest-level people they can reach. Perhaps a similar principle applies in international politics.
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Yes, and there really is a huge literature on this, some of which is worth reading. I'm torn, because a lot of it isn't. I like the idea of pointing out how much of it is nonsense. But dismissing it all is--well, in this case, it's obviously a rhetorical flourish, but if taken at face value, it's worthy of actual debate.
Dec '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Exactly what would he like the U.S. government to do? Nuke Egypt?
He states that the Israelis will now go ahead and look after their own best interests. Mazel Tov. How about explaining exactly how this is supposed to be done? Improving relations with China and other Far Eastern nations? To a certain extent, yes, but this is not a base reliable enough to justify ranting about forgetting about your key ally and benefactor.
Dec '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Political science isn't.
In fact, if they have to tell you it's a "science" it almost surely is something else entirely.
I think computer science is the only exception, but that's because it's too new to find a word that ends in "-ics" to fit.
Oct '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
" Events in Egypt teach us once again that while countries pursue their national interests it is up to governments to define those interests."
I would modify that sentence to read: "Events in Egypt teach us,once again, that the interests of the people will not necessarily be defined as such by their government, who will define and pursue the interests of those who hold power in the government".
Edited on March 26, 2011 at 8:54pmDec '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
The Victoria, delivered in 2009 to her current vessel charterer, is operated by one of the world's largest shipping conglomerates, a company privately-owned by a family of Lebanese origin, based in Marseille.
When a capital-intensive company is assembled without the usual participation in world capital markets, it is probable taxpayers served as its financiers—they were (and likely still are). Its success has also ensued from its owner's personal relationship with French presidents, both past and present.
They deny having knowledge of arms Israelis easily detected, as if tons of scrap metal and large sophisticated missile-launch consoles,warheads, and propulsion systems are delivered and loaded the same way.
Our historic first Islamic apostate president and his team of queens making decisions for him in the Middle East are no friends of Israel. Nor are Western European powers, the extended homeland to boisterously expressive Mohammedan youth who tell their sisters to cover their faces, police to stay out of their neighbors, courts to adopt Shari’ah, and welfare agencies to keep up with cost of living increases for polygamous families.
Each has long lost the will to live under Western freedom; hope Israel still has it.
Oct '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Charles Gordon: The Victoria... operated by one of the world's largest shipping conglomerates, a company privately-owned by a family of Lebanese origin...
When a capital-intensive company is assembled without the usual participation in world capital markets, it is probable taxpayers served as its financiers—they were (and likely still are). Its success has also ensued from its owner's personal relationship with French presidents, both past and present.
They deny having knowledge of arms Israelis easily detected, as if tons of scrap metal and large sophisticated missile-launch consoles,warheads, and propulsion systems are delivered and loaded the same way.
Our historic first Islamic apostate president and his team of queens making decisions for him in the Middle East are no friends of Israel. Nor are Western European powers, the extended homeland to boisterously expressive Mohammedan youth who tell their sisters to cover their faces, police to stay out of their neighbors, courts to adopt Shari’ah, and welfare agencies to keep up with cost of living increases for polygamous families.
Each has long lost the will to live under Western freedom; hope Israel still has it. · Mar 26 at 12:52pm
Thanks for that...well said.
Nov '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Claire,
I think Rubin makes a reasonable point, but your question highlights the fact that he was a bit too concise in making it.
It's probably key to make a distinction between material and ideological interests. No Russian government is ever going to deny the need for warm-water ports, nor will the importance of global choke points like the Suez or the Straits of Hormuz ever cease to be significant.
However, I think he is right in his broader point that regime types matter immensely in defining and prioritizing national security interests. The Shah's Iran and the Mullahs' valued and pursued different objectives. Ditto Hitler's Germany and Adenauer's. A reasonable point, perhaps inartfully rendered.
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Troy Senik: Claire,
It's probably key to make a distinction between material and ideological interests. No Russian government is ever going to deny the need for warm-water ports, nor will the importance of global choke points like the Suez or the Straits of Hormuz ever cease to be significant.
However, I think he is right in his broader point that regime types matter immensely in defining and prioritizing national security interests. The Shah's Iran and the Mullahs' valued and pursued different objectives. Ditto Hitler's Germany and Adenauer's. A reasonable point, perhaps inartfully rendered. · Mar 26 at 2:40pm
I agree with his point, and of course his comment was a rhetorical exaggeration--not even an inartful one to my lights; I liked it. It just put me to thinking about the extent to which it was true. Your comment prompts another series of questions--to what extent do we ever see governments allowing ideological interests to best material interests, under what conditions, do these conditions have anything in common, can they be predicted ...
Jul '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
But Claire, or if you prefer, Cassandra, within hours of the Tunisian spark you were ominously sounding the warning that that spark could roll quickly around the region and we might want to pay attention, and not only has it but tonight it seems even London has joined in, with property crimes above and beyond what is likely to be attempted when secret police are at hand. This may become the next London Fire.
I don't count Wisconsin because it was obviously astroturf. And, of course, we may find out the same of the London riots shortly. The West may be done with unionism at this rate. Why assure a criminal class job security and pensions?
If you want a predictive science to apply to these things, you would be closer to it with economics, especially economics filtered through an expert in the cultural values attached to each question, since value judgments tend to have cultural biases as well as objective constraints like the lack of a warm water port attached. And you would still be a ways off.
Nov '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Sisyphus:
If you want a predictive science to apply to these things, you would be closer to it with economics, especially economics filtered through an expert in the cultural values attached to each question, since value judgments tend to have cultural biases as well as objective constraints like the lack of a warm water port attached. And you would still be a ways off. · Mar 26 at 11:07pm
I'm not persuaded economics is more predictive in such matters- and, interestingly, I think that has to do with your proffered "value judgments" - i.e., the fact/value distinction being at some level utterly alien to political reality. Mansfield explains this beautifully, "A Question for the Economists: Is the Overly Predicted Life Worth Living?"
Jul '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
Robert Lux
I'm not persuaded economics is more predictive in such matters- and, interestingly, I think that has to do with your proffered "value judgments" - i.e., the fact/value distinction being at some level utterly alien to political reality. Mansfield explains this beautifully, "A Question for the Economists: Is the Overly Predicted Life Worth Living?"
Your point is well taken. Mansfield does a nice job of pointing out that economists deal in predictions but scolds them for failed predictions. It is difficult to imagine anyone who has read Hayek on command economies to expect any natural force to render 100% accuracy of prediction. That being the case, I bring no such expectation to the discussion. The "overconfidence" factor is nothing of the sort to my mind, as a consultant I understand the appearance of confidence to be a major component of salesmanship and client management. Beneath the façade, and among themselves, these guys all know better. The problem of knowledge is always with us.
I think Mansfield is a bit off on the concept of virtue. Self-interest very definitely belongs in the virtue camp. And virtue is not a habit, behavior is. Virtue requires conscience, effort.
Jul '10
Re: How Much International Relations and Political Science Theory Do You Need?
(cont. from #13)
Human action is, by necessity, 95%, or more, habit. Unless some conflict arises to engage calculation, the opportunity to maximise virtue is lost. If I do not spend considerable time in the pursuit of self-interest, higher education, career, etc., I am in less of a position to exhibit altruistic virtues.
Mansfield's final assertion is most amusing: [Economics] should abandon the crude positivism that claims that one can study facts without giving advice or that one can confidently predict without causing people to believe in one’s predictions. It needs to replace its false modesty with true moderation. The economist is personally as subject to the laws of economics as the rest of us, and their confidence, their virtue of salesmanship, mitigates toward their remaining in a position to make predictions. (For my reading, there is little valuable distinction here between prediction/advice, advice being a by product of prediction.)
The economic libertarians push models considered rational/efficient by the lights of economics, in part, because this is the world they know and promotion of such a trend is in their interest. Variations in values and inevitable limitations of data and process impede the predictive function.