The Logic Of Internationalism

Is internationalism plausible in today's world or must global relations be characterised by tension and war? The author analyses internationalism's coercive and accomodative dimensions and considers practical problems.

Internationalism is the view that institution-building and peaceful cooperation will make peace and security prevail in a system of independent states. This book examines this controversial topic and discusses whether such a view is realistic or whether international relations are typically characterised by tension and war. Kjell Goldmann seeks to examine the plausibility of internationalism under present-day conditions. A theory of internationalism is outlined and is shown to have two dimensions: one coercive (to enforce the rules and decisions of international institutions) and one accommodative (to avoid confrontation by means of mutual understanding and compromise). Problematic features of the theory are then considered in detail: the assumption that all international cooperation tends to inhibit war, and the tension inherent in the joint pursuit of coercion and accommodation.

By studying the significance and mechanisms of cultural internationalism, this book aims to help emerging international powers constructively engage in global governance in a multipolar world, with particular regard to cultural considerations. Global governance has, to a degree, become more significant than traditional power politics on the international stage. Against this backdrop, the author proposes the idea of a cultural internationalism that centers upon cultural interactions, dialogues and mutual learning, and he calls for international cooperation and a reconstruction of the world order. The rise of the G20 and BRICS countries is cited as an example of the efficacy of international coordination communities built upon both cultural consensus and shared economic foundations, as well as international interactions. The author also delves into China’s case to explore practical approaches to the fostering of supranational responsibilities while not neglecting national interest. The book will appeal to academics and general readers interested in international relations, globalization, and Chinese diplomacy.

The story of global cooperation between nations and peoples is a tale of dreamers goading us to find common cause in remedying humanity’s worst problems. But international institutions have also provided a tool for the powers that be to advance their own interests and stamp their imprint on the world. Mark Mazower’s Governing the World tells the epic story of that inevitable and irresolvable tension—the unstable and often surprising alchemy between ideas and power. From the beginning, the willingness of national leaders to cooperate has been spurred by crisis: the book opens in 1815, amid the rubble of the Napoleonic Empire, as the Concert of Europe was assembled with an avowed mission to prevent any single power from dominating the continent and to stamp out revolutionary agitation before it could lead to war. But if the Concert was a response to Napoleon, internationalism was a response to the Concert, and as courts and monarchs disintegrated they were replaced by revolutionaries and bureaucrats. 19th century internationalists included bomb-throwing anarchists and the secret policemen who fought them, Marxist revolutionaries and respectable free marketeers. But they all embraced nationalism, the age’s most powerful transformative political creed, and assumed that nationalism and internationalism would go hand in hand. The wars of the twentieth century saw the birth of institutions that enshrined many of those ideals in durable structures of authority, most notably the League of Nations in World War I and the United Nations after World War II. Throughout this history, we see that international institutions are only as strong as the great powers of the moment allow them to be. The League was intended to prop up the British empire. With Washington taking over world leadership from Whitehall, the United Nations became a useful extension of American power. But as Mazower shows us, from the late 1960s on, America lost control over the dialogue and the rise of the independent Third World saw a marked shift away from the United Nations and toward more pliable tools such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. From the 1990s to 2007, Governing the World centers on a new regime of global coordination built upon economic rule-making by central bankers and finance ministers, a regime in which the interests of citizens and workers are trumped by the iron logic of markets. Now, the era of Western dominance of international life is fast coming to an end and a new multi-centered global balance of forces is emerging. We are living in a time of extreme confusion about the purpose and durability of our international institutions. History is not prophecy, but Mark Mazower shows us why the current dialectic between ideals and power politics in the international arena is just another stage in an epic two-hundred-year story.

When Franklin D. Roosevelt became president in March 1933, he initially devoted most of his attention to finding a solution to the Great Depression. But the pull of war and the results of FDR's foreign policy ultimately had a deeper and more transformative impact on U.S. history. The Triumph of Internationalism offers a fresh, concise analysis and narrative of FDR's foreign policy from 1933 to America's entry into World War II in 1941. David Schmitz covers the attempts to solve the international economic crisis of the Great Depression, the Good Neighbor Policy in Latin America, the U.S. response to war in Europe and the Pacific, and other topics of this turbulent era. Schmitz describes Roosevelt as an internationalist who set out to promote U.S. interests abroad short of direct intervention. He tried to make amends for past transgressions with the nation's southern neighbors, eventually attempted to open and promote international trade to foster economic growth, and pursued containment policies intended to halt both the Japanese threat in the Pacific through deterrence and German aggression in Europe through economic appeasement. When his policies regarding the Axis powers failed, he began educating the American public about the dangers of Axis hegemony and rearming the nation for war. This effort required a profound shift in the American mind-set, given the prevailing isolationism, the disillusionment with America's involvement in World War I, and the preoccupation with domestic problems. A less powerful president would likely have failed, or perhaps not even attempted, to alter the prevailing public opinion. FDR revived American internationalism and reshaped the public's understanding of the national interest and defense. Roosevelt's policies and the outcome of World War II made the United States a superpower without equal.

A reexamination of America's overloaded foreign policy tradition and its importance for global politics today Debates about U.S. foreign policy have revolved around three main traditions—liberal internationalism, realism, and nationalism. In this book, distinguished political scientist Henry Nau delves deeply into a fourth, overlooked foreign policy tradition that he calls "conservative internationalism." This approach spreads freedom, like liberal internationalism; arms diplomacy, like realism; and preserves national sovereignty, like nationalism. It targets a world of limited government or independent "sister republics," not a world of great power concerts or centralized international institutions. Nau explores conservative internationalism in the foreign policies of Thomas Jefferson, James Polk, Harry Truman, and Ronald Reagan. These presidents did more than any others to expand the arc of freedom using a deft combination of force, diplomacy, and compromise. Since Reagan, presidents have swung back and forth among the main traditions, overreaching under Bush and now retrenching under Obama. Nau demonstrates that conservative internationalism offers an alternative way. It pursues freedom but not everywhere, prioritizing situations that border on existing free countries—Turkey, for example, rather than Iraq. It uses lesser force early to influence negotiations rather than greater force later after negotiations fail. And it reaches timely compromises to cash in military leverage and sustain public support. A groundbreaking revival of a neglected foreign policy tradition, Conservative Internationalism shows how the United States can effectively sustain global leadership while respecting the constraints of public will and material resources.

In a political climate where loose talk of a "third way" passes for political idealism, Waterman's passionate book examines the possibilities for a new style global solidarity suited to complex capitalist modernity. The author examines the past internationalism of Labour and socialists and the present one of radical-democratic social movements, discussing how the Left might build on this experience to recover a humanist and emancipatory tradition of internationalism, which would address our multiple global social problems.