Category: Posts

Recent blog posts.

MIS Comprehensive Examinations (Part II, 3 of 3)

Master in International Studies’ Comprehensive Examinations
University of the Philippines-Diliman
 

August 17, 2009

B. Question number FOUR (International Affairs):
The protests over the results of the latest Iranian elections have become a global concern. Why? How can you explain this phenomenon theoretically?

 

With the advent of the Safavid Empire in West Asia, there was a great alteration of the Persian politics – it is the coming of an Islamic age in great Persia. I have to emphasize the etymological description of these two terms, i.e., Iran and Persia. It was in the regime of Reza Pahlavi that he constructively separated the utility of Iran from Persia. He implemented an executive order that Iran will be used in a political sense classifying the modern state, while Persia will be used in a cultural sense from ancient history to mores and folkways.
Moreover with the coming of Islam in Iran, it was further politically materialized when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini led an Islamic revolution in 1979; even he was ostracized by the Western back-up regime to France. How ironic because at that time, Khomeini wanted to stay in Iraq but Saddam Hussein rejected his proposal and that is why he was able to study the norms and laws of the Western world when he was exiled in France.
Now that Iran became an Islamic Republic with a system based on Khomeini’s ‘velayat e-faqih’ (a system ruled by a supreme leader, with religious and political power, separating its responsibilities to the head of state). The constitution of Iran is unique that it has different subsidiary organs and bodies which have different and unique roles and duties.
The 2009 Iranian election was supposedly a climax in Iranian politics. It was a battle between Ahmadinejad (the conservative, who would like to maintain the status quo) and Moussavi (the reformist, who would like to change the status quo and even contested the legitimacy of the supreme leader – the current Ayatollah Khamenie). 
It was an epic battle that may have changed Iranian’s art of governance if Moussavi had won, especially that he was relentlessly campaigned by his wife. A manifestation that emphasized the roles of women in the whole social, political and cultural strata of Iranian’s society. Not only a change in its domestic politics, but a configuration of ‘real politik’ in the Middle East region and in the world.
Robert Cox’s “Critical theory” emphasized the significance of culture and religion in the behavior or norms of a state. Iran’s Islamic Republic prevailed over the reformers and was materialized with the help of a hegemon within the state’s affair, i.e., the supreme leader. Much of the Iranians, with an exception numbers from the youth (who was borne after 1979), wanted to preserve its traditions, culture, and maintain the status quo.
This theory further explained that all knowledge is ideationally interconnected. Rejecting that there are “no facts” about the world only ideas are existing. Khomeini’s velayat e-faqih plus Islam is equals to an idea that displayed a politically constructed Iranian politics and its views to the world. Some of the norms, mores, and folkways were gradually modified. Even a social construction about the family, the roles of men and women were constructively altered basing on Shites traditions with additional teachings from Khomeini.
The election in Iran is a global concern because the result of it might change how the Iranians conceive its relations to the world, particularly to the US, Israel, and to the Arab world. The US and Israel’s securitization of Iran’s nuclear energy is a major issue and debated among IR scholars. Israel is consistent in delivering its ‘speech act’ that Iran is an existential threat to the Israeli’s nationhood or survival and to the peace process with the Palestinian people (Barry Buzan and Olan Waever, the Copenhagen Securitization framework).
Realists contend that since Israel has an allegedly advanced nuclear arsenal then Iran will do the same, procuring nuclear technologies to develop weapons because they sees Israel’s nuclear weapons as a threat to their security, thus a security dilemma is taking place. (John Herz, Security Dilemma in International Politics) More so, a mirror-imaging is happening; just like what occurred in the arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
Holsti in his work about principles, objectives, and conducts of foreign policy argued that with this kind of scenario, i.e., Israel perceived Iran as a threat to their survival because of the rhetoric of Pres. Ahmadinejad at the Columbia University that Zionism must be eliminated from the page of time, and not as what the international media is saying – Israel must be wipe-out off the map, quoting the late Ayatollah Khomeini, and the resentment over religious turfs between the Sunnis (Arab countries) and the Shites (Iran and Syria) is an indication that the Arab countries (together with the out-casted Libya of Khadafi) might counter the perceived rising hegemony status of Iran through a foreign policy approach of balancing. 
Pres. Obama would still engage diplomatically with the Iranian regime on the nuclear issue and would now become ‘tough’ with the Israeli regime on the resettlement issues in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Therefore, the Iranian election underlines the complexities attached in its political and power struggle in the region. Not only in the region, world powers have interests in the Iranian politics, i.e., the US diplomatic engagement with Iran on nuclear issue, China as the biggest consumer of Iranian oil and gas, and Russia’s military commitment with Iran (that if it is attacked, Russia will compel a ‘Second strike’.
Therefore, the Iranian election underlines the complexities attached in its political and power struggle in the region. Not only in the region, world powers have interests in the Iranian politics, i.e., the US diplomatic engagement with Iran on nuclear issue, China as the biggest consumer of Iranian oil and gas, and Russia’s military commitment with Iran (that if it is attacked, Russia will compel a ‘Second strike’ target to the attacker) – this is also embodied in the provisions of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). 

MIS Comprehensive Examinations (Part II, 2 of 3)

Master in International Studies’ Comprehensive Examinations
University of the Philippines-Diliman
 

August 17, 2009

A. Question number TWO (ASEAN Affairs):
The presence of State Secretary Hillary Clinton at the ASEAN Regional Forum Senior Officials Meeting was partially intended to send the signal that the United States was “back” in Southeast Asia. What is the significance of this message to the countries in Southeast Asia? What does it illustrate at how international relations is framed in Southeast Asian affairs?

 

The presence of State Secretary Hillary Clinton at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) Senior Officials Meeting sent a significant message to the Southeast Asian countries that the US hegemony will remain strong in the region despite its experiences from the effects of a financial crisis and economic recession, and also, to counter the rising dominance and power of China in Southeast Asia as an arbitrary balancer, so to speak.
This manifestation debunks the ‘Declinist School of thought’ originated from the work of Paul Kennedy, which stipulates a reduced or declined in the legitimate power of the United States in the world, and soon will be in counter-hegemony with the European Union, China, India, Russia or even Brazil through balancing, bandwagoning, hedging, leash-slipping among these actors in the international system. 
The event justified the empirical findings presented by Charles Krauthammer in his work “The Unipolar Moment” concomitant with Stephen Krasner’s Unilateralism. These two views emphasized the legitimacy and power of the US hegemony encompassing space but delimited in a given time period, i.e., from the post-Cold era to the present.
As embedded in the 2006 National Security Strategy of the United States, two specific premises were constructed: 1) to promote freedom, justice, and democracy; 2) to lead the nations of the world to uphold democratic ideals in its governance. These two principles embody the US foreign policy in its conduct and promulgation.
John Gerard Ruggie’s “Constructing World Polity” argues that the US action in the ARF meeting was a manifestation of adhering to the ideals of Multilateralism as opposed to the propositions purported by Krauthammer and Krasner. It is a stealth Unipolar and unilateral action. Because of the US economic recession and the unpopular legacy of the Bush administration, Pres. Obama and his team has no other way but revived the US legitimate hegemony in the international community.
The Secretary of State is busy strengthening the US relations in every part of the world especially in the Muslim world. One of which is strengthening its political and security relations with the countries in the Southeast Asia through the channel of the ASEAN Regional Forum. Continuing the fight against terrorism, pressuring Myanmar regarding the Suu Kyi’s case, and conducting its ‘Grand Strategy’ in the region.
Employing joint military exercises with the Philippines, Indonesia, and now Vietnam. The US sent military officials and soldiers in Laos and Cambodia to teach with their counterparts of the use of the English language – a similar strategy when they emancipated the Philippines educational system by sending soldiers as teachers for the Filipinos. They enhanced its military and defense relationship with Indonesia because according to American think tanks, they foresee the dominant (leadership) role of Indonesia in the region with their vast resources – demography, strategic land areas, and economic capabilities by 2020s.
A part of this grand strategy are the US-India nuclear partnership, the US-Japan Theater Missile Defense (TMD) treaty and helping Japan to become one of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and the US hedging engagement with China through building military partnerships with China’s neighbors (to contain its hegemony in Asia) while maintaining strategic economic relations with China.
Consequently, with these underlying occurring events, the international relations in Southeast Asia is becoming highly complex interdependence as Charles Doytes’ “transactionalism” explained based from Keohane’s and Nye’s “Power and Interdependence,” but with an additional element on Doytes studies; the US is building a security community in Southeast Asia. 

MIS Comprehensive Examinations (Part II, 1 of 3)

Master in International Studies’ Comprehensive Examinations
University of the Philippines-Diliman
 

August 17, 2009

Required question number ONE:
Should ASEAN intervene in the trial of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi? If yes, how and why? If no, why not? Explain your answer with reference to a specific theoretical perspective in international relations.

 

The trial of Daw Aung San Suu kyi has sparked widespread criticisms in the international community especially from democratic nations (which are mostly Western states and some ASEAN member states). It was interpreted by some hard-line critics as a ‘Kangaroo court’ because the judicial system of Myanmar (Burma) was heavily controlled by the military regime.
If we will based in a realistically manner – a common understanding of the existence of a reality – then we can easily assume that Realism or even Neorealism can be an appropriate International Relations theory to explain the situation, i.e., answering the question. However, the question also posited other theoretical notion(s) in international relations which may give alternative explanation, in theoretical manner, the hypothetical possibilities of ascertaining a different angle or side of the story of a particular situation.
Liberalism or even Liberal Institutionalism (Neoliberalism in short) can give its perspective to describes, explains, and predicts the overall outcome of the trial. David Baldwin in his work “Neorealism and Neoliberalism Debate in Contemporary World Politics” argued that every authors, writers, or scholars had ‘normative biases’ which were grounded from their upbringing and certain values.
In my own perspective, Realism can best answer the postulated query, from its interpretation of the conception of intervention to the simplistic rational outcome of the issue. This theory emphasized the centrality and autonomy of a state, which concentrates on the pursuit of its interest by means of power (only high politics issue area) as a leverage in an anarchical international system.
Member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have no right to intervene in the domestic affairs of each member as embodied in the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) enunciated by the principle of non-interference. According to one of the core principles or epistemological assumptions of Realism, the autonomy and centrality of states is the most significant and important construction of state in the international system. The reason being is that it emphasized its authoritative power through sovereignty (Robert Jervis, Abiding Sovereignty).
Sovereignty is the supreme will of a state for it gives authority to hold a definite juridical territory with a given community of peoples. Other scholars would add the element of recognition to sovereign state by another state. These are the two kinds of sovereignty – the internal and the external sovereignties.
Realists contend that intervening in the domestic affairs of a state is a breach to its sovereignty. And even if ASEAN intervenes, the military regime in Myanmar will rationally maximized its self-centered interest as a form of their national interests by raising a veto in the decision-making system of the ASEAN, which permeates that when one member raised their objection through a veto regarding an issue in the ‘Leaders Summit’, then, that issue will not be decided or resolved. ASEAN follows the principle of consensus as the only decision-making process.
Further, if ASEAN compels to intervene in the trial, Myanmar will not comply to any actions made by the association for it will not be punished.

 

In sum, the court’s verdict to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was 3 years of imprisonment with heavy public community services but was downgraded to 18 moths of house arrest as ordered by the military regime. This resulted to a public outrage and havoc from the international community, even in the statements delivered by co-ASEAN members. The theory of Realism was the appropriate operational language in explaining this particular situation.

MIS Comprehensive Examinations (Part I, 3 of 3)

Master in International Studies’ Comprehensive Examinations
University of the Philippines-Diliman
 

August 10, 2009

Question number FIVE:
What is the Hegemonic Stability theory of International Political Economy? Discuss the contending views of the theory of Realism and Liberalism in regard to the role of the Hegemon in constructing international regimes toward its preferred kind of international cooperation? Illustrate the role of the hegemon in the formation of the present international monetary and trade regimes.

 

The Hegemonic Stability theory originated from the works of Charles Kendleberger, which stipulated that a hegemon will provide for the stability and order in the international system. Robert Gilpin insulated the significance and importance of the United States in leading for the creation of the Bretton Woods System that paved the way for International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) which is now the World Bank (WB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). He argued that when a hegemon is weak, its leadership in the regime will decline and will affect a change in the regime. That’s what happened with the disintegration of the Bretton Woods System when the influence and leadership of the U.S. declined because of its commitment in other world affairs or regimes.
Realists contend that international institutions, organizations, and regimes are just extension of state’s power and the reason why states cooperate in an arrangement is because it has interest on it. However, Neorealists argued that regimes can change and alter the behavior of states particularly maintaining the status-quo and the distribution of power in the regimes based on incentives and opportunities. If there was an alteration from the distribution of power based on state’s interest back up by incentives and opportunities, then in retrospect, a change in regime will occur.
Liberals contention on the role of international institutions, organizations, and regimes on states is a necessary one so as to validate the universality of ethical morality and rule of law in an international system. Woodrow Wilson’s 14 points have inspired for the creation of collective security through the League of Nations. Power struggle is evil and bad characterization of a state in international system which is especially based on rational principles of law, morality, and reason.
Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye (Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition) have clearly stated the role of a hegemon in the formation of the international monetary and trade regimes. With the floating liquidity in the balance-of-payments, the decline of standard rate of Gold, the unstable foreign exchange rates have led the U.S. to step-up to resolved the problems by leading the establishment of the Bretton Woods System in early 1940s which will regulate foreign exchange rates as the US Dollar, the sole prime indicator of all exchange rates in the world.
From the Bretton Woods System regime, emergence and establishment of IBRD, WB, IMF, GATT were transpired. WB giving loans to poor nations, IMF maintaining a stable foreign exchange rate system, and GATT to monitor (protectionist) policies of states in their economic activity and by reducing trade barriers among states.
The 1952 Geneva Convention on High Seas have restricted states to own the international waters, thereby, granting high seas as international waters (no states can subject it to its jurisdiction) through scientific and navigational purposes. It’s important to know the complex interdependence thesis which gave three significant types in the conduct and process of a regime: 1) multiple channels which connect societies (transnational actors like non-governmental organizations and Multinational Corporations were given importance in International Politics); 2) absence of hierarchy among issues (economics, culture, environmental issues constitute low politics is considered significant, if not, equal to high politics of military, diplomacy, and foreign policy); and 3) the minor role of military (it is not necessary to respond militarily or by force to issues like economics, cultural, environmental or religious crises/conflicts). 

MIS Comprehensive Examinations (Part I, 2 of 3)

Master in International Studies’ Comprehensive Examinations
University of the Philippines-Diliman

 

August 10, 2009
 
Question number FOUR:
The theory of Realism, as the dominant theory of International Relations, has been subdivided into different variants/strands. What are these strands of the theory of Realism? Compare them in terms of actors, level of analysis, stable distribution of power, power transition, and the goal of the drive for power.

 

All realists submit to the premise that Realism is sufficient enough upon itself for purpose of explanations and normative justifications. (Martin Griffiths, Idealism, Realism, and International Politics: A Reinterpretation)
In Classical/Traditional Realism signified the centrality of states (as a unitary and rational actor in International Politics), which is motivated by national interest driven by power for the purpose of survival in a ‘self-help’ international system. (International society is different from international system for it promotes society of nations under the English School of IR as originated from Hedley Bull’s “Anarchical Society.”) 
In Hans Morgenthau’s “Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace” (1948), he expounded on the idea of ‘Balance of Power Realism’ wherein states as the central actors in International Politics distributed with approximated equal power. Power is the basic determinant of state behavior. Before World War I, the Great Britain used to be the arbiter among the six power relations (hegemons) whereby secret diplomacy and alliances are balanced.
In contrast, he believed that a global bipolar is dangerous because of two reasons: 1) the diplomacy is conducted in pseudo-parliamentary forums and 2) the two superpowers were inexperienced to the traditional way of diplomacy.
In the ‘Human Nature Realism’, developed by Carr, Morgenthau, and Waltz; they argued that power is rooted from human nature and in which man is selfish, self-interested, and his life is characterized by brutish, nasty, and short. This is because the conditions of life were unpleasant which force man to try to dominate and oppress others.
In state-level, states are driven by power motivated by national interest in its conduct of foreign policies. While in the international realm, there is the problem of anarchy which is the lack of central government/authority that affect the behavior of its units (states primarily) through agents, which will enforce general laws. Thus, states are forced to behave as they do.
Structural realist Kenneth Waltz in his work “Theory of International Politics” introduced a new variant, ‘Hegemony Realism’ in which there is a need to have a hegemon to affect or influence the international system, even though he reiterated the confluence of structures in the international system which directly affects the behavior of its units. His Neorealism was characterized by a sophisticated analogy in expanding the realist contribution on its roles to ‘cooperation’ which was changing because of the interdependent factors, such as the role of states in maintaining the international economic order.

Defensive/Offensive Realisms by Mearsheimer was a construction of power for states to deter or repel aggressors through operations of First and Second strike capability. Thucydides works are imperative to discuss which most of the influential realist writers refer to his scholarship that dated 2,500 years back. He wrote the story of the Peloponnesian War between the Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta and the Melian Dialogue, when the people of Melos appeal for neutrality and morality to the Athenians but had face the iron fist of a stronger city-state which is until now relevant in modern world politics.