2018-0507 SISG-760 Group 3

             The concept of socializing human rights into a one size fits all model seems flawed for the current state of world politics. The idea that social pressure from Western nations will convert human rights abusing regimes into responsible actors seems to hinge on the idea that the west is better equipped to decide what is and isn't abuse. It would seem from a two-way perspective that this approach is now only flawed, but may not work with the current balance of power within the international realm.             Much like the idea of Orientalism, the idea of overarching human norms brought about my NGOs and activists seems to share dreaded roots with colonialism. Even if these goals are for the better treatment of domestic populations, it is still unnerving to think that encouraging "subversive" groups to infiltrate countries and incite change is akin to supporting a coup or social revolution. These movement should...

        While wandering the halls of the Portrait Gallery, a fine Smithsonian museum located for your convenience just off the Gallery Place metro station in DC, the other week, I strayed across an exhibit that fails to appear on the website. It is a series of low-altitude and closer images taken by the artist (unnamed here due to lack of appearance on the website) of places that are blacked out on US satellite imaging. In some circumstances the artist has tracked down some national security-related reason that explains the blackout, which is then posted with the image. Presumably for visiting foreign actors to note down. The exhibit leads into a section dedicated to the rising use of facial recognition software. A young man, visiting the gallery launched into the evils of the software, IDs of protestors etc.             This vignette floated back across my mind when the global public sphere arose as our clas...

Andrew Cooper presents arguments for and against celebrity diplomats in his 2007 Beyond Hollywood and the Boardroom: Celebrity Diplomacy . While many of his arguments against such a cultural phenomenon are valid; most celebrities don’t have the same educational and career backgrounds as a foreign service officer, there is the potential for conflicting business interests, and celebrities are often out of touch with the average joe off the street, there is one major problem with his reasoning. He wrote it down in 2007. By all accounts, foreign and domestic, American diplomacy has undergone a one hundred and eighty degree turn from its heading in 2007.             This is, to some degree, to be expected. American diplomacy is a system designed to undergo leadership changes every four to eight years. Along with that we usually see some changes in our foreign policy. The last few years, however, have produced such a switch that forei...

The United States has been considered for the past couple decades to be the superpower. With this consideration, the term unipolarity has been associated. However, this term doesn't adequately conceptualize the changing distribution of capabilities in twenty-first century global politics. There is definitely change afoot with the rise and fall of some great powers, but nothing so significant as to change the international system. This could bring about the question of the United States' position in the international reals, is it in a decline? Well, who is there to challenge the US? The only three candidates would be the European Union, Russia and China. Economically the EU has potential, but it isn't even an established state yet. Russia is definitely an aspiring great power, but not quite at the superpower level. As for China, the most likely contender, its focus is still on regional dominance. Great powers should have superior military capacity, economic capacity and te...

Hollywood style diplomacy could quite possibly define our generation’s international persona. The culmination of this trend is President Trump’s surprising election, placing a celebrity business mogul into the nation’s top diplomatic position. High profile activism is by no means new. Susan Sarandon, Audrey Hepburn, and Jane Fonda were doing this, arguably, before it was cool. The difference between celebrity activists then and now however is the increasingly smaller divide between public authority and popular culture and the entrance of the celebrity into official politics. I argue that the day when politicians hold greater sway in international issues and likewise domestic policy is coming to an end. I predict that in the coming elections we will see celebrities overwhelming elections with their well-established fan bases and popular appeal. This can be colloquially considered the age of glamour politics in which debates turn into reality TV and public policy revolves around large ...

The European Union is a unique body that lies somewhere between the realm of a nation-state, international actor, and a non-governmental actor. Its ability to influence different regions without force makes it a legitimate actor in international politics. Indeed, it is one of a kind. It has undergone significant changes since its conception after World War Two. The longer it has been in existence the larger it has grown and the greater its influence around the globe particularly on its member states. In “Constructing authority in the European Union”, McNamara discusses how symbols (ie. the euro, the EU flag) and their interaction with practice empower Europe’s role as a global governor. Through its functional and symbolic efforts, the EU has gained political power and authority. The EU influences politics such as the movement of money, people, goods and services. For example, it has established a single market, a borderless state, and social safety nets for its citizens. The idea...

            While reading McNamara, it seems that there was a lot of energy towards the European Union with regard to a changing of the old guard. Nearly a decade later, it seems like the global public sphere is still wishful thinking that we seem unable to obtain. The EU seemed to be the best visualization of such an idea, yet nationalism and increased fractionalization has thrown this image into question.             The public sphere doesn't seem to be sustainable as an idea in our current state of world politics. Even within the United States, the idea of integration is being questioned by current political trends and a growing divide in ideas of what our future should look like. It seems we have become so disenfranchised with out neighbors, that slavery seems to be on par with gay rights as legitimate things to discuss within the public sphere. Radicalization has thrust our nation into stratified chaos. If the US can't ke...

Today and throughout history we have seen instances where countries give up their full sovereignty to remain economically stable. Initially after reading “Beyond the sovereign dilemma: quasi-states as social construct” , I disagreed with Dr. Jackson’s view that third world nations would allow international paternalism in exchange for better living conditions. However, after considering it more thoughtfully it seems that Jackson’s view holds true for many places across the globe. While it may not appear logical for third world countries to enter into international economic agreements that would constrain their sovereignty, nations like Egypt during Ismail’s reign prove that autonomous actors do, in order to prevent placing a huge burden on their population. A more recent example of this has been Greenland’s consistent decision to remain apart of Denmark in order to continue receiving subsidies. Thus, Dr. Jackson’s view that negative sovereignties trade in their independence for wealth ...

The public sphere is considered to be a place where citizens can share information, debate issues and opinions, and challenge the interests of higher powers. How then do advancements in technology hinder the function of the public sphere? While information sharing on the internet is crucial to advancing the public sphere around the world, or global public sphere, this information has been proven to be exploitable by governments. Also the development of the media's role has significantly changed causing the idea of a global public sphere to questionable. Online privacy can not be really expected. They say once the information is out there, there should be no expectation of privacy. Individuals are usually unaware of how governments and companies use the information they gather about them online. This information, though, is willingly shared as people search the internet, use mobile apps, and contact their friends and family. This allows governments and companies to intrude on thei...

Risse and Sikkink, in the first chapter of their collection of essays on human rights, put forth a theory that is repeated in our video lecture, the Boomerang Model. The Boomerang Model is based on a fairly straightforward concept; a civilian group within a nation-state takes exception to a policy/policies enacted by that government and attempts to sway their government away from that policy. When that doesn’t work the civilian group instead lobbies third-parties such as Western powers, human rights NGOs, and international groups with an interest in human rights.                   Pussy Riot is a particularly notorious example of a civilian interest group that could be classified in the boomerang model. Fed up with Russian oppression of, well, everything, Pussy Riot formed as a feminist protest punk rock group in the summer of 2011 to draw attention to their chosen issues in a particularly memorable way....

I would like to answer the question posed by group 3 in this week's class: can free trade cause a fundamental change in the international system? The concept of fundamental change has been discussed in this class already. I tend towards the realist perspective that without some cataclysmic change to the international, fundamental change isn't possible. However, there is room for substantial changes within the international system, and this is where free trade has a foothold. Many diverse countries have chosen to liberalize unilaterally their trade policies, like Mexico, India, Poland, Ghana, and Spain. The General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade, Uruguay Round, further liberalized trade among many developed countries and between them and developing ones. While free trade seems to be the sound economical move, countries have been slow to come to terms with or it or even fully integrate. They still seek some form of protectionism. The idea of free trade though came about from a...

Corporate activism appears to now be the rule rather than the exception. Large corporations which often become symbols of culture such as Starbucks and McDonalds for the United States and IKEA for Sweden are increasingly engaging in social missions that decades ago were considered the realm of activists. Indeed only a few decades ago these same large corporations were typified by socially detached CEOs increasingly determined to perfect supply chain mechanisms at all costs. What I think changed is the emerging global public sphere which strongly influenced their consumers. If there is something corporations care more about than flawless supply chains, it is the patronage of their consumers. Some of the most outspoken CEOs, now considered social entrepreneurs, include Howard Schulz of Starbucks and Kevin Thompson of IBM although the two have very different styles. Schulz is publicly seen as a CEO activist taking a stance on issues far related to someone’s morning coffee. He has dra...

            The pace of technology has begun to weigh in on the integrity of state sovereignty at an unprecedented pace. The usual response is fear, followed by blame, but slanderous views of progress will not detract from the momentous movement we find ourselves in. Technology has empowered globalization, and the increasingly decentralized nature of data has led to questions of whether the state can cope with these momentous changes without redefining its boundaries. Those who are slighted towards classic hierarchical structure will see this trend as the destruction of the state, but those of us who learn to adapt will see this as merely an evolutionary step towards cultural hybridity.             Data meltdowns, powerful non-state actors, and increased visibility of world events have led to widespread fear among homogeneous and inflexible nations. The idea that a corporation like Google or Facebook holds more data than the U...

Today’s political rhetoric is difficult to navigate. This is due to confusing messages sent from the current US administration, but also echoes from the base which flung it into office. One very publicized reason for the conflict now engulfing the US economy is the emphasis on trade and more precisely, the actions of multi-national corporations. These companies hold considerable wealth and power which threaten the position of the US. The United States is concerned with maintaining control of its economy. President Trump continually attacks friend and foe alike in defense of this aim. He has recently aimed at automotive manufacturers, pharmaceutical, and technology companies who utilize well-developed and versatile transnational means to acquire extreme wealth and ultimate efficiency, in his mind, at the expense of American people. Whether President Trump is aware of the current international atmosphere or not is unclear. What is abundantly evident, however, is that multinatio...

Due to free trade and open markets globalization has caused an international upsurge in production and consumption which has had a negative impact on our environment. Moreover, globalization is making it harder to pass environmental policies. Institutions like the World Trade Organization, for example, make it difficult to implement environmental regulations because they fear such policy might threaten trade agreements and economic competitiveness. According to Copeland, there are three reasons why environmental policy is harder to implement in a more open economy. Governments may yield to pressure to be less aggressive on environmental policy because of concerns about international competitiveness International trade agreements have constrained the flexibility of governments to implement environmental policy Environmental policies will me less effective in open economies because firms can avoid them by shifting productions to countries with weaker policy regimes In mo...

Professor Jackson posed the question, and it was discussed in class, concerning holding corporations accountable. Some of the biggest offenses made by corporations internationally has to do with the environment and human rights, which could have tremendous impact on the world. As of now, there isn't a viable and effective process in place to hold corporations responsible for their actions across borders. Non-financial reporting could be part of the solution to this problem. Transnational firms are growing in numbers and their reach is spreading. With an increase in power and global reach, more of the problem areas are coming to light like poor working conditions and complicity to human rights violations. Plenty of people are arguing about corporate accountability, but haven't provided a solution. Some have argued that non-financial or corporate social responsibility reporting is that solution, and I would have to say that I definitely see the benefits to this. Non-financial...

            As corporations become larger, more powerful, and fluid, our centralized institutions seem to be challenged more and more. The idea of impermeable states, with regard to economic corporations, has already been challenged by technology, data collection, and sheer spending ability, but decentralized institutions may pose an even larger threat. The blockchain, and what it can provide to states, represents the ultimate cost benefit conundrum: should we allow for even faster transactions, or preserve state sovereignty?             As a public distributed ledger, the blockchain allows for limitless potential for lightning fast transactions across borders. Utilizing tokenized blockchains, microloans can help farmers in developing countries gain access to funds without the need for massive debt or interest offered by the IMF. Decentralized ledgers allow for better, transparent data collection which would greatly benefit co...

As Frieden and Rogowski mention in the very first pages of their article, the first consideration of international business must be cost versus reward. US corporations with vast overseas investments, such as Apple or McDonalds, must always first consider what the cost to their bottom line will be. McDonald’s has mostly dodged a large drain on profits, by establishing supply chains through their host countries. In this way they avoid excessive import/export duties on their products. Apple, on the other hand, liaises very publicly with their host countries’ government to achieve more favorable agreements for their products.                 The US likes to keep an eye on the international agreements and transaction that US-based corporations engage in, as that is shaped by, and alters in turn the US approach to dealing with international corporations interested in exporting their goods to the US. Many of these t...

Realists and  pragmatists alike deny the public authority of supranational organizations based on their incongruities and seeming incompatibility with nation states. Specifically the EU/EC comes under condemnation for its invasive nature. The typical American would recoil at the idea of a similar organization taking place in  North America. I, however see supranational public authority as being in the process of legitimating. The problem critics have with this legitimization is that it does not fit the Westphalian system established for the past several centuries. We currently see nation-state public authority as legitimate because it follows the general guidelines set after the peace at Westphalia. Strict respect for territorial lines, general agreement to stay out of internal affairs, and rejection of inter-christian wars became the standard of public authority. Later,  wide-spread democratization and state consolidation strengthened these guidelines by reinforcing th...

The role of public authority is abundantly clear when considering that of nations. There, the government of choices flexes their authority so that taxes are paid, lawbreakers are imprisoned, and in some cases, that the government itself undergoes scheduled changes, like the US system of electing a new leader every four years. In other situations, the origin, continued existence, and raison d’etre for public authority is rather murkier. I write, as Phillip Williams has previously done much more eloquently, of ‘unofficial’ groups who wield their own version of public authority either as part of a nation-state, or as their own, separate entity. Some of them are traditional, in that we the residents of superpowers, have simply become accustomed to seeing them scroll across our news channels; FARC, the Mafia, the Taliban. Others are newer. The elephant in the room, ISIS, is arguably less than a decade old, but its so imprinted on our collective social subconscious that is too is headed ...

The more connected our world becomes the more challenging it is for a state actor to maintain their full autonomy. The frequent convergence of power, ideas, and interests that takes place in a globalized world forces states to negotiate with one another causing shifts in the roles of actors. Furthermore, “states share the stage with a wide variety of non-state or sovereign-free actors” (161). Therefore, globalization may be regarded as a threat to national sovereignty because diversification and the rise of new agencies causes transformations in the way in which order and security are normally maintained by the sovereign state.  The increase in private security companies around the world marks a shift in domestic and international security governance. These private companies influence other agents and actors though their coercive capacities (Abrahamsen 14) altering the role and authority of the state. The notion that non-state actors threaten the autonomy of national sovereigns ...

            The idea that developed nations are better at controlling themselves than developing nations is the epitome of the us versus them mentality. In Gusterson's view of Western nations versus the rest, we can see a well developed case for why each nation should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Equally as unfair as claiming certain nations cannot have such weapons is the idea that no nation should have them after powerful nations have benefited from them for so long.              This argument really falls inline with similar arguments surrounding climate change. Climate change is a problem, and we have learned that factories and rapid industrialization worsens this problem. After having benefited from child labor, poor working conditions, and massive pollution, the United States and other western nations find themselves the moral authority on who can and cannot pollute to empower their economy. "We understand wh...

Gusterson's article discusses the possibility of nuclear weapons being launched in our lifetime and the likelihood that they would be launched by third world countries. A nuclear war is a troublesome thought in and of itself, but the real threat is not the third world leaders. The dangerous situation is nuclear weapons in the hands of non-state actors like transnational criminal organizations or terrorists. The Non-Proliferation Treaty made nuclear weapons alright for five countries and "illegal" for everyone else. Still, though, we know that there are countries not within the group of five that have nuclear weapons. If these states can bend the rules, then what's stopping non-state actors, not bound by the treaty, from going after nuclear weapons? Nothing, except maybe the difficulty of acquiring the materials or weapons themselves. A terrorist attack involving nuclear weapons isn't inconceivable or impossible, though it may be improbable. Terrorist groups do...