Long Test 1 (Student Slides) - PolSc 130

for Monday, September 28, 2026

Geographic scope (WPS)

• a dispute in the eastern part of the South China Sea (SCS), specifically encompassing the waters within the Philippines’ 200-naturical-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)

Legal and Political Designation of the WPS

• “West Philippine Sea” is a political and social construct officialized via administrative order to legally delineate Philippine sovereignty

Historical claims of the WPS

• the designation was established to explicitly counter China’s sweeping, unilateral historical claims represented by its “Nine-Dash Line”

WPS: Philippines’ self-help and China’s power projection

• the international system lacks a centralized authority. In the West Philippine Sea, this forces both China and the Philippines to operate within a “self-help” system

• the Philippines filed a 2013 UNCLOS case to challenge China’s claims, seeking legal recourse in a system that lacks an enforcement mechanism to execute rulings

• as the Philippines is materially outmatched by China, the former used UNCLOS as a “soft balancing” strategy in order to offset the power asymmetry that was happening

• the 2016 Arbitral Award, which invalidated China’s nine-dash line, acts as the legal leverage that enables the Philippines to mobilize external allies like the US and Japan

Structural anarchy, security dilemma, zero-sum

• limits of law

  • under anarchy, legal victories like the 2016 Award act as “paper shields” without relative material power to enforce them

• security dilemma

  • China’s “defensive patrols” are perceived by the Philippines as offensive threats, triggering mutual distrust and military buildup”

  • China uses raw power projection (swarming 56 vessels and placing unauthorized structures at Scarborough Shoal) to establish physical control

• zero-sum game

  • any maritime feature or energy resource blocked by China is an absolute loss to Philippine sovereignty

External balancing of Philippines and China in terms of military

• according to the Lowy Power Index, the Philippines is outmatched militarily (2nd vs. 16th in Asia), so it deepens security alliances with the U.S., Japan, and Australia for deterrence

Duterte Administration

• viewed hard-power resistance in the West Philippine Sea as pointless, and the US as an unreliable ally

• their strategy focused on domestic economic development by shelving the 2016 Arbitral Award to attract infrastructure investments from China and to ease military friction

Marcos (Jr.) Administration

• shifted national security priorities back to defending territorial integrity, national sovereignty, and the country’s Exclusive Economic Zone

• their strategy became aligned with the country’s military leadership, national security, and the public’s consensus on anti-coercion

Executive threat perceptions on the WPS

• Neoclassical Realism helps explain that international systemic pressures do not directly dictate state behavior, and instead filters external threats through domestic intervening factors (e.g. leadership changes)

• the leadership change from Duterte to Marcos Jr. reframed China as a severe threat, allowing the Philippines to mobilize resource-extractive capabilities for defense

• recent developments in the Philippine Coast Guard are examples of translating national power

Why is realism a fitting framework to explain the WPS dispute?

• it accurately explains why hard power controls outcomes and how smaller states get caught in great power dynamics

• the rivalry between the US and China frames the dispute as a major arena in the broader struggle for regional dominance, rather than a localized border conflict

• theories do not need to mirror every detail to provide true understanding, as their value lies in mapping “what-if” scenarios (Rice, 2019)

• it correctly predicts that relying on legal structures without physical military strength will lead to the degradation of Philippine EEZ control by China’s superior naval force

• the 2016 Arbitral Award, which invalidated China’s nine-dash line, acts as the legal leverage that enables the Philippines to mobilize external allies like the US and Japan

• “the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must” — Thucydides

How did the Russian-Ukraine war start?

• Ukraine gained independence in 1991 which led to closer ties to the West

• in 2014, conflict started after pro-Russian President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych was removed and Russia annexed Crimea afterwards

• in 2022, the war exalted to stop Ukraine from aligning with the West

Exchange of Prisoners of War (POWs) between Russia and Ukraine

• serves as a rare point of cooperation between the two sides

  • both countries freed 200 prisoners as of March 5, 2026

Current developments of Russia and Ukraine through a realist lens

• each side acts in its own interest to:

  • recover human resources

  • preserve national morale

  • preserve state capacity

• zero-sum game

  • one’s gain is another’s loss = broader peace talks remained stalled and frozen

Realism

• a theoretical framework that views global politics as an enduring competition for power and security among self-interested states that is within an anarchic system

• one of the most dominant schools of thought, especially following World War II

• state acts in its national self-interest: survival through power

• presents a world where: the individual is self-interested, the state is unitary, and the international system is anarchic

Neo-Realism (Structural Realism)

• analyzing state’s behavior through the structure of the international system

• Ukraine-Russia war revolves around nations protecting and surviving on their own in an anarchic system

Key actors in the Russian-Ukraine war

• Russia

• Ukraine

• USA

• EU

• NATO

How is the international system anarchic?

• no central governing authority

• states operating on self-help

• prioritization of own security and self-preservation above all else

  • Ukraine

    • unitary actor focused on its own national survival

    • took primary responsibility for its own defense

    • bypassed global institutions to seek bilateral military aid → international law offers no automatic protection

  • Russia

    • ignorance of international treaties

    • paralyzing the UN Security Council through its veto

    • relying on military force

Security dilemma and relative gains in the Russian-Ukraine war

• perceived threat: continuous NATO expansion into neighboring states, including its alliance with Ukraine

  • NATO frames enlargement as a defensive alliance for member security

  • Russia sees the expansion as a threat

• relative gains & zero-sum game

  • NATO-Ukraine alignment meant the relative loss of Russian influence and strength

Realist take on Ukraine’s actions

• popular take: “the United States pushed forward policies towards Ukraine that Putin and his colleagues see as existential threats to their country

  • reiterates the concept of the zero-sum game

  • fails to consider Ukraine’s own national interest to seek NATO/EU membership

    • economic independence from Russia

    • shift in Ukraine’s power dynamic from Russia

    • Ukraine’s own identity as an independent, sovereign state which Putin does not recognize

Ukraine’s western alignment movement explained through realism principles

• statism

  • sovereign states as the primary and supreme actor;

• survival

  • ensuring the state’s survival;

• self-help

  • state must rely on their own to survive;

• self-interest

  • strengthening Ukraine means weakening Russia

• Western Aid and Sanctions: Tools in Power Politics

  • Western assistance to Ukraine

    • provision of $50B in financial and military aid

  • sanctions on Russia

    • banned Russian banks from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT)

    • restrictions on Russia’s access to foreign reserves

    • blacklisting Russia’s central bank

    • Western companies’ suspension of operations in Russia

  • such measures are seen to be driven by national interests

  • empowers ally and undermines rival

Basic background on the Cambodia-Thai border conflict

• a long-running and unresolved border dispute between these two countries that escalated into sustained armed conflict in 2025

• 1950’s: Cambodian independence from France, border conflict begins

• 1962: ICJ rules in favor of Cambodia

• 2008: Cambodia has Preah Vihear Temple declared as a World Heritage Site

• 2013: ICJ clarifies in favor of Cambodia

• 2025: conflict escalates once more

• first skirmish on May 28, 2025:

  • a Cambodian soldier dies due to the skirmish, both sides accuse each other of initiating

• phone call leak:

  • Thai prime minister calls Cambodian senate president, refers to him as “uncle” and calls the Thai military “the opposing side”. She was ousted from the premiership

• escalation:

  • Thai soldiers die to landmines, unclear who placed them

• 72-hour ceasefire called December 27, 2025

  • immediate halt to military operations, mutually clearing out landmines

What is the most contested site along the Thailand-Cambodia border?

• Preah Vihear temple

Current developments in the Cambodia-Thai border conflict

• undefined border

  • border areas still disputed

• closed land border between Thailand and Cambodia

  • virtually no land border trade

• damaged Thai-Cambodian labor relations

  • damages both nations economicaly

• continued lack of trust between Thailand and Cambodia

  • worse diplomatic relations

• damaged ASEAN credibility, centrality, and viability

  • another challenge for ASEAN

Features of Realism

• the state is the principal actor in war/politics

  • state-centrism: the state has the final say and is our unit of analysis. Individuals, businesses, and international organizations exist but have limited power

• the state is a unitary actor

  • the state acts as one unified voice. Internal conflicts do not drive/influence the actions of the state, they give way in the fact of external threats

• political actors are rational

  • cost and benefit analysis. If costs outweigh benefits, do not proceed. Decisions made based on what will forward national interest

• the state is concerned with security issues

  • survival is the prerequisite to everything else

  • states ‘at minimum, seek their own preservation and, at maximum, drive for universal domination’ (Waltz, 1979)

• it’s a ‘zero-sum game’

  • one state’s gain is another state’s loss

  • security dilemma: one state’s security is another state’s threat

Application of the features of realism to the Cambodia-Thai border conflict

• the state is the principal actor in war and politics

  • international organizations like the ICJ are called to rule/mediate, but the states themselves have the final say in complying

  • Thailand refused ASEAN mediation

• the state is a unitary actor

  • despite both Cambodia and Thailand having domestic disputes/internal conflicts, the state is still able to act in response to perceived external threats (ex. PM fired)

• political actors are rational

  • Thailand only agreed to mediation after the US refused to participate in tariff negotiations until the conflict ends or a ceasefire is reached, acting on its self interest at the moment

• the state is concerned with security issues

  • contested borders are a security issue: leads to potential violence

  • Thailand suspended the implementation of the November 2025 US-backed peace deal after 2 casualties on their side. Continuing with the agreement is no longer in its national interest. Security concerns outweigh the desire for peace

• it’s a ‘zero-sum game’

  • any territory that Cambodia gains on the Thai-Cambodia border is seen as a loss for Thailand (e.g. Preah Vihear Temple)

  • security dilemma, arms race: Cambodia had been reinforcing their military positions along the border prior to the July 2025 clashes

  • on December 8, 2025: Thailand renewed airstrikes on Cambodia’s military locations in the border amid a ceasefire after accusing Cambodia of mobilizing heavy weaponry and repositioning troops

Liberalism

• the behavior of states — hence, levels of international conflict and cooperation — reflect the nature and configuration of state preferences (interdependence and the international system)

• cooperation through institutions; reduce conflict and competition; market-oriented

• sees human nature as collaborative and equal among one another

Liberalism: primacy of social actors

• “fundamental actors in politics are members of domestic society, understood as individuals and privately-constituted groups seeking to promote their independent interest”

Liberalism: representation

• “all governments represent some segment of domestic society, whose interests are reflected in state policy”

Liberalism: positive sum game

• all states benefit, even if not equally

Key concepts of liberalism

• obsolescence of war

• democratic peace

• human rights

• free markets

Brief history of SDGs

• June 1992: more than 178 countries adopted Agenda 21, a comprehensive plan of action to build a global partnership for sustainable development

• September 2000: member states unanimously adopted the Millennium Declaration. The summit led to the elaboration of eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to reduce extreme poverty by 2015

• 2002: the Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development and the Plan of Implementation was adopted, and it reaffirmed the global community’s commitments to poverty eradication and the environment

• June 2012: member states adopted the outcome document “The Future We Want”

• 2013: the General Assembly set up a 30-member Open Working group to develop a proposal on the SDGs

• 2015: adoption of several major agreements:

  • January: the General Assembly began the negotiation process on the post-2015 development agenda

  • March: Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction

  • July: Addis Ababa Action Agenda on Financing for Development

  • September: the General Assembly culminated in the subsequent adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, with 17 SGDs at its core

  • December: Paris Agreement on Climate Change

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

• serve as the blueprint to achieve a more sustainable future for all

• they collectively address the global challenges we face, including those related to poverty, inequality, climate change, environmental degradation. peace and justice, and the goal is to achieve them all by 2030

SDG #1

• no poverty

SDG #2

• zero hunger

SDG #3

• good health and well-being

SDG #4

• quality education

SDG #5

• gender equality

SDG #6

• clean water and sanitation

SDG #7

• affordable and clean energy

SDG #8

• decent work and economic growth

SDG #9

• industry, innovation and infrastructure

SDG #10

• reduced inequalities

SDG #11

• sustainable cities and communities

SDG #12

• responsible consumption and production

SDG #13

• climate action

SDG #14

• life below water

SDG #15

• life on land

SDG #16

• peace, justice and strong institutions

SDG #17

• partnerships for the goals

Current situation and challenges of the SDGs (169 targets)

• 36% on track

• 49% progressing slowly

• 15% regressing

• annual funding gap for the SDGs. estimated at around 4,000 billion dollars

• regions not on track to eradicate extreme poverty by 2020: sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East & North Africa, and Oceania (excluding Australia/New Zealand)

Notable highlights of current SDG progress

• access to electricity: 92% of global population

• capacity for renewable energies: 2.2x

• forced child labor: prevented for 20M children since 2020

• professionally assisted births: 87%

• access to the Internet: 74% of global population

• HIV infections: decreased by 30%

• social protection: 50% of global population

• decline in unemployment: dropped to 4.9% in 2025

• protected ecosystems: 2x since 2015

• increase in parliamentary seats occupied by women: 22.4% to 27.4%

Biggest challenges in current SDG progress

• refugees: 2x since 2015

• extreme poverty: 10%

• displacement: 118 million due to conflict

• climate disasters: 2x as many affected

• global warming in 2025: rose by 1.43°C

• population living in slums: 1.16B

• food insecurity: 2.3B

• young people out of school: 237M

• debt: 8.9T for low and middle-income countries

• official development assistance: declined by 23.1%

Contradictions of development in SEA in comparison to liberalist assumptions

Liberalist assumptions:

• market-driven growth, economic prioritization

• state as neutral, regulatory body

• individual rights and procedural democracy

• binding rules and enforcement by transnational institutions and agreements

Development in SEA:

• growth as state-directed

• state as a direct intervenor, wherein development requires direct action

• collectivist cultural norms; aligned with SDGs necessitating collective action

• non-interference & consensus

Contradictions in the Philippines: economic priorities vs. sustainable development

• GOAL: transition to around 35% renewable energy by 2030 and 50% by 2040.

  • In 2023, the Philippines' installed power capacity was 43.85% coal versus 29.75% renewable energy.

• Demand for cheap, reliable energy for industrialization

• Long-term requirements of:

  • SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy)

  • SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities)

  • SDG 13 (Climate Action)

  • SDG 15 (Life on Land)

• Tension between infrastructure-led growth in achieving economic targets and sustainable growth

  • Creates trade-offs

  • E.g., “Build Better More” program

• This case emphasizes that goals must consider stricter environmental safeguards, green design standards, and alignment with renewable energy & climate commitments.

Contradictions in the Philippines: cooperation vs. non-interference

• The Philippines signed the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution, calling for transboundary cooperation in the prevention and monitoring of forest and land fires.

• Principles upheld by ASEAN: (1) non-interference, (2) national sovereignty, and (3) consensus-based decision-making.

• ASEAN’s institutions produce shared norms among its countries but lack strong supranational enforcement, leaving commitments rather aspirational as haze episodes recur.

• UNESCAP: “Existing data show that the region is on track to achieve only 14 targets by 2030, with seven SDGs having no targets on track”

• PH case: presents itself as a pro-cooperation member by signing such agreements and remaining active in ASEAN working groups

  • Ironically remains non-interventionist when the problems at hand concern sensitive domestic issues.

• Philippines’ 2026 ASEAN Chairmanship: Manila must balance respect for sovereignty with the need to “meaningfully intervene” on regional crises—precisely the tension that shapes how much cooperation can translate into SDG gains.

Primary articles for ASEAN

• membership open to all states of Southeast Asia that share the organization’s aims, principles, and purposes

• cooperation in economic, social, cultural, technical, and educational sectors

• promotion of regional peace and stability through respect for justice, the rule of law, and adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter

• representation of the collective will of the nations of Southeast Asia, to bind themselves together in friendship and cooperation

• secure blessings of peace, freedom, and prosperity through joint efforts and sacrifices

Important ASEAN qualities

• ASEAN Way: sovereignty and non-interference

  • consensus

  • consultation

  • commitment

  • peace between states

• ASEAN Centrality:

  • characterizes the ‘nucleus’ and ‘institutional hub role of ASEAN in regional affairs in SEA and the wider Indo-Pacific’

  • about the ‘larger dynamics of regionalism and regional architecture in Asia Pacific and beyond’

Philippines-China relations: most recent encounter

• September 7. 2026

  • Chinese forces fired flares at an unarmed Philippine Coast Guard aircraft doing a routine surveillance flight over West Philippine Sea

Philippines-China relations: varying interests

• from its conception, the consensus draft was met with different interests

• ASEAN helped create a joint code of conduct on contested territory

• 1990s: beginning of talks on CoC

• 2002: signing of Declaration of Conduct of Parties

• 2016: arbitral award from UNCLOS

• 2018: drafting of single draft negotiating text

Vietnam-China relations: brief history

• the fall of Au Lac kingdom (Vietnam) due to Nan Yue kingdom (China)

  • start of 1000+ years of relations

  • permanently engraved in national history

• Sino-Vietnamese (1978)

• 1991: normal relations resumed, but suspicions and unaddressed issues remain

  • on the basis of independence, self-reliance, complete equality, and non-interference into each other’s affairs

• “the identity of Vietnam as a nation has been defined by multiple struggles against China throughout the course of history” (Do, 2021)

Vietnam-China relations: what glued them

• similarity in political ideals (communism) → #1 value

• personal ties between respective founders

• economically beneficial (but more so for Vietnam towards China than vice versa)

Vietnam-China relations: shifts in perspective

• realization that “China’s foreign policy was guided by its national interests, not by ideology” = ideological courting, but disagreed with China’s claims to sovereignty over truong sa + hoang sa

• stemming from a desire of economic self-reliance and sovereignty, Hanoi increasingly associated its interests with international law and stood firmly against any acts deemed as an infringement of its maritime interests

  • while expanding cooperation with China, Vietnam also moved to seek admission to ASEAN and improve its relations with Western countries, including the U

    • kept neutrality to not send China the wrong message (balance of economic and security prospects) → “bamboo strategy”

• 2014: China’s deployment of an oil rig in Vietnam’s Exclusive Economic Zone (FEZ) and continental shelf → 2 months of protests, infuriated citizens, and stand-off between the countries’ vessels

Philippines-Vietnam (+China) relations

• June 2026: PH-Vietnam strengthened defense ties to bolster maritime security and maintain peace in the disputed maritime region

  • despite overlapping claims in the Spratlys, the two often work diplomatically together

• both currently dealing with maritime issues in China despite proofs of ownership, but current approaches are different

  • Vietnam: (at least its govt.) usually prefers to maintain neutrality with China in order to balance its economic and security interests (except when these interests are threatened)

  • Philippines: openly/publicly condemns Chinese actions while dealing with frequent maritime conflicts with them over the WPS

• historical conflict: in 1968, Filipino troops established a military garrison in Pugad Island, but Vietnamese forces took possession of it in 1975

  • result: these issues were swept under the rug as recommended by Washington at that time

Historical institutionalism

• focuses on understanding political, social, and economic changes through the lens of institutions

• analyzes how institutions impact individual behaviors and broader societal outcomes

• emphasis on path dependence and critical junctures

Historical institutionalism: method

• using macro/international level of analysis

• status quo → exogenous event → critical juncture → new status quo (path dependence) = it’s a cycle

Why does historical institutionalism work for analyzing the evolution of ASEAN?

• exogenous event: Cold War

• critical juncture: emergence of ASEAN: ASEAN Way and ASEAN centrality

• path dependence: success of ASEAN in maintaining regional stability

• Philippines’ path dependence trajectory

  • 2002 code of conduct signing (ASEAN way: “peaceful engagement rather than decisive intervention”)

  • 2016 arbitral ruling on WPS (ASEAN member states resulted in fragmented bilateral support)

  • present developments show the slow progress

• Vietnam’s path dependence trajectory

  • the 1000 year history with China

  • Haiyang Shiyou 981 oil-rig incident

  • they’re able to balance their partnership with China (same political ideology, opposing views on claiming rights)

• in recent developments

  • the issue between PH-Vietnam, but not prioritized as much because of the heightened pressure and clashes with China

  • led to Vietnam cooperating with PH

  • ongoing, slow progress and negotiation talks

Four primary themes of liberal institutionalism

• cooperation in post-war Europe

• recognition of supranationalism

• deepened EU integration

• crisis-centric evolution

Evolution of EU as seen through the themes of liberal institutionalism

• cooperation in post-war Europe

  • the first states (EU-6) formed institutions such as the ECSC to account for more cohesive and foreseeable cooperation on areas of commonality (e.g. trade, defense)

• recognition of supranationalism

  • the European Communities start capitalizing on having their institutions gain more authority and influence based on the member states

• deepened EU integration

  • with a more established presence, the Union holds firm on its pace of evolution as it now has the discretion to act as a sui generis entity capable of deciding on its own

• crisis-centric evolution

  • faced with the onslaught of new issues in the contemporary world, the Union is forced to respond to crises with action whilst maintaining their relevance

Current developments in the EU

• September 16, 2026: State of the European Union address (SOTEU) - Ursula von der Leyen (President of European Commission)

• July 14, 2026: enlargement

• Joint defense (800 billion Euro)

• Budget War 2026

Enlargement debate

• EU expanding its borders, considering: Ukraine, Moldova, Montenegro, and Albania

• boost of 512 million

• but EU demands strict legal checkpoints: 33 policy checklist called Copenhagen Criteria

• information asymmetry

  • lacking balance information, thus fear of breaking EU from the inside

• European Commission as Auditor

  • they force applicant countries through 33-policy checklist

  • replacing geopolitical fear before integration

€800 billion mobilization (pivot to joint defense)

• EU is radically centralizing its defense

• European Commission launched the European Defence Projects of Common Interest (EDPCI)

• functional spillover

  • economic integration switched to industrial and military integration out of necessity

• transaction cost

  • cheaper and faster for 27 states to buy together through EU than to negotiate 27 separated contracts

Multinational financial framework (2028-2034, 7 years)

• the 27 member states are in intense debate over the EU’s 7 years budget

• European Commission wants to invest more on defense and tech, while traditional members want to stick with budgeting local farming and agriculture

• path dependency

  • state members are effectively locked-in in EU, despite the heavy debates

• absolute gains

  • ensures that they keep repeating the game until compromise is struck

How does the EU represent liberal institutionalism?

• because sovereign [member] states rationally established its formal rules, shared norms and autonomous supranational bodies as strategic tools to overcome anarchy and secure economic gains

EU trading

• trade is a central pillar explaining how liberal institutionalism facilitates cooperation within the European Union

• Free trade and removal of barriers in the EU

  • EU has an established common market, where all intra-Union trade barriers are removed (TEU [Art. 110, Par. 10])

• a trading state > a military state

  • the early beginnings of the EU (establishment of the EU-6), was a treaty prompted by the end of World War

    • ECSC to EEC (Treaty of Rome)

    • establishing the 4 freedoms

Absolute gains of the EU

• the single market

  • member states trade freely without tariffs, and all participating countries grow

  • the EU also trades with third countries instead of as individual states

  • Common Commercial Policy (CCP)

  • Common Customs Tariff (CCT)

EU is a model of regional and global governance where law-making power from individual states is pooled into ______________

• supranational bodies/institutions

• the EU also utilizes Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) which prevents single ‘powerful’ state from blocking consensus on key governance issues, which ensures collective decision making

• primacy enables EUs ‘regional’ governance, by allowing the EU law to override conflicting national laws

• the EU also binds its own foreign policy to international organizations like the UN

  • (TEU Art. 21, Par 1)

    • “the Union’s action on the international scene shall be guided by the principles which have inspired its own creation, development and enlargement, and which it seeks to advance in the wider world: democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and International law”

The elimination of trade barriers has allowed for functional spillovers. What are these in the context of EU?

• cooperation in one economic sector which has lead to the evolution and growing interdependence in others

• ex. Trans-European Rail Network

The elimination of trade barriers has allowed for political spillovers. What are these in the context of EU?

• political actors begin shifting their priorities towards the “new center” leading to the creation of shared governing entities common policies for all member states

• ex. European Parliament

The presence of legislative and regulatory bodies in the EU — how does it connect to liberal institutionalism?

• the EU’s jurisdiction grows past simply an economic entity

  • the Eu has facilitated the creation of legislative and regulatory bodies to facilitate the idea of global governance alongside ensuing member cooperation

• the creation of multiple interdependent channels to resolve specific issues related to economics, human rights, and international relations presents the characteristic equal care for all issues proposed by Liberal Institutionalism

Examples of legislative and regulatory bodies in the EU

• European Parliament

• European Commission

• Council of the European Union

• European Council

• Court of Justice (CJEU)

European Parliament

• political representatives of EU citizens, with legislative and budgetary powers

European Commission

• proposes new legislation and implements decisions made by the EU

• external representation of the EU

Council of the European Union

• serves as the main law-making entity of the EU

• made up of national government ministers

European Council

• a political summit comprised of the heads of state of all EU member countries

Court of Justice (CJEU)

• the legal body of the European Union that oversees the application of EU law across member states

• note: ECJ (European Court of Justice) is a branch within this

Does liberal institutionalism fully explain the development and future of the European Union?

• liberal Institutionalism explains the motivations for the initial creation of the ECSC in the effort to make war “materially impossible” (trading state better than a military state) and its ongoing expansion

• in the case of the EU, absolute gains fail to fully encapsulate the compromises made by member states in order to adhere to the EU's set guidelines and economic standards. While being members of the EU's single market provide a certain amount of gains, it has become a point it has become a point of contention among members states that they cannot fully exercise their economic capabilities due to the major regulatory rules in place by the EU (ex. UK Brexit)

• liberal institutionalism cannot fully explain the current democratic deficits within the EU and the growing disassociation that EU citizens feel towards it in comparison to their own state politics alongside the rise of Euroscepticism

International Criminal Court (ICC)

• world’s first permanent, independent international court

• created to prosecute individuals that are responsible for the most serious international crimes

Understanding the ICC

• court of last resort

  • Principle of Complementarity

  • states have the primary responsibility to investigate & prosecute

  • ICC steps in when countries are unwilling or unable

• relies heavily on state cooperation

  • ICC has no police force or army

  • depends on states to arrest suspects and assist investigations

  • without cooperation, suspects may remain free

• scope

  • ICC tries individuals, not states or governments

• membership

  • 125 member states

  • Philippines withdrew in 2019

Constructivism

• ideas that states develop and share through their interactions

• a theoretical framework that emerged in the late 20th century to challenge dominant theories in Realism and Liberalism (Batara et al., 2021)

• focuses on the creation of meaning, ideas, norms, identities, and shared beliefs in shaping international politics

  • ex. “How did the state come to believe that children deserve to have their own rights in the first place?”

Why was the ICC established? + from a constructivist perspective

• Post–Cold War: growing emphasis on dignity, quality of life, and human rights

• these values and aspirations changed in the international political system

• “Never Again” → contributed to the international norm of accountability for mass atrocities

• from a constructivist perspective: “this developed expectations of acceptable and unacceptable state behavior. The ICC turned these norms into an institution and legal mechanism. It pursues justice, accountability, and protection of human life”

Actors impact structures, and structures impact actors

• two-way relationship: states help create institutions like the ICC, while institutions also shape how states behave

Constructivism as…

• constructed: shaped by states’ interactions, beliefs, and shared meanings

• emergent: these shared meanings develop and change over time

Current developments of the ICC

• the ICC is currently facing a highly challenging period in its history

• despite notable achievements

• in prosecuting individuals, the court confronts an existential crisis due to strong diplomatic and economic opposition from the United States and an unexpected wave of member state withdrawals

The geopolitical repercussions & United States sanctions

• the discord stems from the International Criminal Court's arrest warrants for prominent figures, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, outside its typical jurisdiction

  • U.S. Dismantling Initiative: In July 2026, the Trump administration began efforts to dismantle the International Criminal Court (ICC), with Secretary of State Marco Rubio calling it an “illegitimate international organization” that compromises U.S. sovereignty.

  • sanctions on court leadership: In August 2026, the U.S. imposed sanctions on ICC President Tomoko Akane and senior trial lawyer Abdoulaye Seye, freezing their U.S. assets and barring them from U.S. transactions. The ICC reports that half of its judges and both deputy prosecutors are now sanctioned, viewing this as a "flagrant attack" on its independence

Exits of member states and shortcomings in enforcement

• the court's authority is being significantly weakened due to structural non-compliance and a decreasing number of members

  • Departure of Member States: Under U.S. pressure and regional discontent, several countries are exiting the Rome Statute. Chad cites U.S. diplomatic pressure for its withdrawal, while Venezuela also plans to leave. In Africa, military juntas have led Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger to consider withdrawal

  • Enforcement Challenges: The ICC lacks a police force and relies on its 125 member states for arrests. However, countries like Germany, France, and Poland have stated they would not arrest Prime Minister Netanyahu, indicating a divide in adherence to international law

Recent developments and status of current ICC cases

• Rodrigo Duterte (Philippines)

  • following his surrender in early 2025, the International Criminal Court's Pre-Trial Chamber upheld all charges of crimes against humanity against the former President of the Philippines. His trial is set to start on November 30, 2026

• Darfur Probe (Sudan)

  • in July 2026, the International Criminal Court (ICC) announced new evidence linking senior military leaders to war crimes and their command responsibility in Sudan, including intercepted communications and documents

• Khaled Mohamed Mohamed Ali El Hishri (Libya)

  • an ex-senior official of Mitiga Prison, extradited from Germany, faces charges of crimes against humanity, including murder, torture, and rape, and is scheduled for trial

Duterte ICC case timeline

February 10, 2025: the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC applied for an arrest warrant against Duterte for the crimes against humanity of murder, torture and rape

March 12, 2025: Duterte was surrendered to the International Criminal Court

January 26, 2026: the Pre-Trial Chamber I found Duterte fit to take part in the pre-trial proceedings and rejected the Defence’s request for an indefinite adjournment

April 23, 2026: Pre-Trial Chamber I unanimously confirmed all the charges comprised of three counts of crimes against humanity and committed him to trial before a Trial Chamber. The opening of the trial is scheduled for 30 November 2026

[MATCHING TYPE] Constructive Perspective (Fehl, 2004; Leonard, 2005) on the individual level:

some institutions are so widely accepted within a group of states that they have come to be constitutive of its identity

the ad hoc tribunals have always been vulnerable to charges of ’victors’ justice’.

application:

• on 30 August 2011, the Philippines deposited its instrument of ratification to the Rome Statute of the ICC. The Statute will enter into force for the Philippines on 1 November 2011 (ICC - the Philippines Becomes the 117th State to Join the Rome Statute System, n.d.)

• on March 17, 2019, Duterte withdrew from Rome Statute, because of "baseless, unprecedented and outrageous attacks" by U.N. officials, and violations of due process and presumption of innocence (Lema & Morales, 2018)

• in accordance to Duterte’s arrest in the ICC: while 58% disagreed with Duterte’s arrest, 26% agreed with his arrest and surrender and 16% remained undecided (Calimbahin, 2025; Mateo, 2025)

[MATCHING TYPE] Constructive Perspective (Fehl, 2004; Leonard, 2005) on the national level:

• sovereignty is an example of a social arrangement that is created by rules, but also creates rules

• Article 17.1 of the Rome Statute defines the principle of complementarity where the Court determines the inadmissibility of the case

application:

• the Philippines exercised its sovereignty by joining the ICC and accepting its rules on accountability, but later invoked sovereignty to withdraw from the institution

• Atty. Joel Butuyan confirmed that Duterte’s arrest is legal, finding basis on national and international law (Duterte’s Arrest Complies With PH Law, Says ICC-accredited Filipino Lawyer, 2025)

• while the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Statute took effect on 17 March 2019, the Court retains jurisdiction with respect to alleged crimes that occurred on the territory of the Philippines while it was a State Party (Situation in the Republic of the Philippines, n.d.)

[MATCHING TYPE] Constructive Perspective (Fehl, 2004; Leonard, 2005) on the international level:

• the ICC maintains the primary attributes of sovereignty. However, this supreme authority only exists within the realm of humanitarian law and is applicable only to those situations where ICC jurisdiction exists

application:

• while the Philippines remains sovereign and retains primary authority over its domestic affairs, its membership in the Rome Statute subjected it to international rules concerning humanitarian crimes and accountability