✅ASOS + consolidation

• Main ideas of the anarchical society + society of states theory:

• Acceptance that there is anarchy in the global system- absence of overarching authority

• States have an informal understanding that ensures a degree of cooperation- based on norms + rules that inc levels of trust + reciprocal behaviour

• Hedley Bull, 1977

• Bull identified the idea of an anarchical society within which a society of states operates in spite of this anarchy. A society of states is formed when states realise they have common interests + values + will benefit from working together. When this happens, states begin to interact + impact on each others’ decisions, so ‘they behave- at least in some measure- as parts of a whole’

The realist + liberal approaches to international relations can seem to be unhelpfully _____ opposed

diametrically opposed

Bull 1977 attempted to reconcile the 2 viewpoints of realism + liberalism by suggesting a ____?

global framework based upon a ‘society of states’

What does the ‘society of states’ interpretation accept + challenge?

accepts that the liberal desire for global governance does not yet exist, but equally it challenges that realist assumption that states seek only their own immediate advantage.

How does a society of states not amount to global governance?

since states remain the key decision-makers + can act unilaterally when they perceive it is in their best interests to do so.

the more that states adopt a collective approach to problem-resolution, the less ______ international relations become

anarchic

Anarchical society=

the term used by Bull in his 1977 book. It is the idea that global politics is in a state of disorder as there is no higher authority than nation-states w the power to control global politics

Society of states=

global politics is a system in which states attempt to establish order by forming alliances, creating international institutions + laws

At the heart of the division between realism + liberalism is the extent to which _____?

order + cooperation can be brought to global politic

what did Bulls book (1977) set out to explain?

the nature of world order in global politics

What did Bull’s theory of the ‘anarchical society + society of states’ argue?

that the world order is neither completely anarchical nor are there highly authoritative structures that might be deemed to be a ‘world govt’. But states, selfish though they are, do find a middle ground of cooperation

According to Bull states find a middle ground of cooperation as they recognise ____?

• It is in their interests to avoid disorder + chaos + the unrestrained aggression + lack of accountability that would result

• It is not in their interest to give up control + sovereignty to a ‘world govt’

The possibilities for order in global politics therefore operate on a ____? + It is important to remember that?

spectrum, that the ‘society of states’ is still in many ways anarchical. It is prone to periods of stability + instability. As organisation such as the UN is part of this SOS, but it is only capable of doing what states allow it to do

In this middle ground of the ‘society of states’ we can find ___?

 both the successes + disappointments of global governance. Here we find the humanitarian interventions that didn’t take place when, morally, they should have - but states failed to agree it. Here, we find the enlightened self-interest of international treaties + organisations where states agree to work together to solve problems that they share + make the most of opportunities for co-operation

core message of Anarchical society/ society of states theory?

• A neo-realist sides w there being a form of anarchy in world politics

• States remain at the apex of the global system

• They cooperate in international organisations but only to preserve their interests

• As such a ‘society of states’ emerges

Anarchical society/ society of states theory  in essence attempts to?

bridge the divide between liberalists + realists- by placing sovereign states as the paramount entity in world politics but w a pragmatic view that states will cooperate to some degree to preserve their sovereignty + interests

the spectrum:

anarchical society (realism)

society of states 

world govt (liberalism)

summary of anarchical society

• No global body w any authority, states acting selfishly + independently

• Frequent clashes between states as they compete for power w/out any authority or law restraining states’ behaviour

• Hobbesian view of the world order: ‘nasty, brutish + short’

• Security dilemma becomes a key risk in an unstable order where states may miscalculate or misread others’ intentions

summary of society of states

• Convergence of realism + liberalism

• States realise they have common interests + vales, + will benefit from working together

• This society is built on diplomacy, ;’norms’ (e.g. R2P) +. Rules (e.g. IGOs). Many norms have subsequently become international law (e.g. human rights)

• This society is formed despite states’ selfish, realist principles - these tendencies don’t disappear, so the society can be stable or unstable

summary of world govt

• States would surrender all sovereignty to a single global authority

• A world govt would be an authoritative source of power able to impose order on states

• All states would be signed up to international law (no choice), which would not be selective or unenforceable

• This model doesn’t exist, could be said to be utopian or idealism

• States aren’t prepared to accept this loss of sovereignty, nor to agree on a body which would have the legitimacy to command global power. This is why it doesn’t exist

One world, rival theories

• The study of international relations is supposed to tell us how the world works, it’s a tall order, + even the best theories fall short. But they can puncture illusions + strip away the simplistic brand names- such as ‘neocons’/ ‘liberal hawks’ - that dominate foreign-policy debates. Even in a radically changing world, the classic theories have a lot to say