̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - international relations

Opinion: ̽��ֱ��AI Summit was a promising start – but momentum must be maintained

fpjl2 — Wed, 08 Nov 2023 13:41:59 +0000

Given the frenetic pace of AI development, the international consensus demonstrated at the AI Summit is much-needed progress, says AI expert Dr Seán Ó hÉigeartaigh.

Opinion: Britain and Europe: a long history of conflict and cooperation

Anonymous — Tue, 21 Jun 2016 15:46:59 +0000

Britain’s referendum on the EU marks another step in the country’s long and troubled history with its European neighbours. Divorce or not, Europe will continue to have a huge influence over British politics and society – history has a few lessons for us here.

Europe made the UK. ̽��ֱ��emergence first of England as a nation state was the product of European pressures – to defend itself against Viking raids. So was the formation of the United Kingdom, which rallied England and Scotland against the France of Louis XIV.

Moreover, Europe has almost always been more important to us than the rest of the world. ̽��ֱ��18th century statesman and philosopher Edmund Burke, for example, spoke of a “Commonwealth of Europe”, long before the British Commonwealth of Nations was even thought of.

̽��ֱ��nature of the European challenge varied greatly over time. It was always strategic. In the Middle Ages the main enemy was France. In the 16th century and early 17th centuries it was Spain. From the late 17th to the early 19th century it was France again; in the mid to late 19th century it was Tsarist Russia. Then, in the early and mid-20th century it was first the Kaiser and then Hitler’s Germany; and then Russia again – with a brief interruption after the fall of the Berlin Wall – from the end of World War II to the present day.

Very often, the danger was also ideological. From continental heresy in the Middle Ages, through counter-reformation Catholicism (which also become a synonym for absolutism and continental tyranny) in the 16th and 17th centuries, French Jacobinism in the late 18th century, right and left wing totalitarianism in the 20th century, to Islamist terrorists arriving from Europe as migrants today.

Anti-Jacobin sentiment in 18th century British papers. Library of Congress

Furthermore, Europe has profoundly shaped domestic politics in the UK. It has been the subject of argument without end for hundreds of years. In the 16th and 17th century there were furious debates over the best way to protect Protestantism and parliamentary freedoms in a Europe in which both were under severe attack.

From the 18th century onwards, Britons disagreed on the best strategy for maintaining the European balance of power. ̽��ֱ��prevailing orthodoxy among one side of parliament (the Whigs) looked to alliances and armies on the continent. ̽��ֱ��Tories on the other side called for greater restraint and more focus on the country’s naval and colonial power. Throughout these debates, some argued for military intervention on the continent and interference in the internal politics of sovereign states there, while others demanded equally passionately that Britain should stay out, for reasons of pragmatism, as well as principle. Both views are well represented in both major political parties today.

Of each other’s making

If Europe made Britain, then Britain also made Europe. ̽��ֱ��British shaped Europe in their interests and increasingly in their image. Their military presence and reputation on the continent was usually formidable, from the iconic victories at Agincourt, Dunkirk, Blenheim, Dettingen, Waterloo, in the Crimea, during the two world wars to the deterrence in Europe under NATO. It was enhanced rather than reduced by the fact that many of these triumphs were secured with the help of coalition partners.

Britain played an important, and often a decisive role in most of the major European settlements since the late 17th century: the treaty of Utrecht, which enshrined the principle of the “balance of power”, through the Congress of Vienna, which remodelled Europe after the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars – right down to the treaties on European Union we have today.

Plus, Britain saw and realised its security through the power of ideology. This began with the defence of the Protestant interest in the 16th and 17th centuries, the protection of European “liberties” in the 18th century, the promotion of liberalism in the 19th century, and the spread of democracy in the 20th and 21st centuries.

Euroscepticism and engagement has a long history. US Library of Congress

Britain has therefore been distinctive in Europe. Its European story is not merely separate and equal to that of the continent, but fundamentally different and more benign. ̽��ֱ��British pioneered two innovative forms of political organisation: the nation state as represented in parliament and then the concept of multinational union based on a parliamentary merger of Scotland and England.

Over the past 500 years, by contrast, Europeans have explored political unhappiness in many different forms. These have ranged from absolutism, through Jacobinism, Napoleonic tyranny, Hitler, Soviet communism, to the well-meaning but broken-backed European Union today.

Continental Europe, in short, had failed before 1945, and even now the European Union is only failing better. Unlike virtually every other European state, which has at some point or other been occupied and dismembered, often repeatedly, England and the United Kingdom have largely – with very brief exceptions – been a subject of European politics, never merely an object.

This should not be an occasion for British triumphalism. On the contrary, whatever the outcome of the referendum on membership, the European Union is not the UK’s enemy. ̽��ֱ��failure of the European project, and the collapse of the current continental order, would not only be a catastrophic blow to the populations on the far side of the channel but also to the UK, which would be directly exposed to the resulting storms, as it always has been.

Brendan Simms, Professor in the History of International Relations, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge

This article was originally published on ̽��ֱ��Conversation. Read the original article.

̽��ֱ��opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author(s) and do not represent the views of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

Brendan Simms (Department of Politics and International Studies) discusses Britain's relationship with Europe, from the Vikings to the Referendum.

Wikimedia Commons

̽��ֱ��Battle of Waterloo by William Sadler II

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-ShareAlike

North Korea unveils its nuclear ‘treasured swords’ to the world again

Anonymous — Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:31:47 +0000

North Korea’s announcement that “normal operation” was again underway at its Yongbyon reactor complex sent a characteristic wave of anxiety through the world’s Pyongyang watchers. ̽��ֱ��country’s nuclear ambitions had, after all, been largely forgotten in what seemed like a lull in North Korea’s fractious relations with the wider world.

Even as the Korean peninsula itself endured a summer of high tension, the West’s complicated fear of North Korea has been displaced by a myopic public narrative currently fixated on the European refugee crisis, the murderous idiocy of Islamic State, and the travails of Donald Trump.

Things are clearly rather different on the inside. ̽��ֱ��regime’s primary tool of geo-political leverage can have slipped nobody’s mind – and North Korea’s recent statements speak volumes about how the Kim regime conceives of its nuclear programme.

Back to the Byungjin line

In North Korea’s worldview, nuclear capability is the only thing that can ward off the chaos and collapse that befell Iraq, Libya and Syria. As the recent statement put it, these weapons are a “measure for self-defense in the face of the US extreme hostile policy and nuclear threats towards it”.

̽��ֱ��highest echelons of North Korea’s bureaucracy have seen the footage of erstwhile ally Muammar Gaddafi being brutalised and killed in the dust and dirt. None of its institutions or leaders have the slightest intention of repeating his experience.

̽��ֱ��Kim regime thinks this should be obvious. If anything, North Korea’s statement of September 15 expresses an incredulity that Pyongyang’s position is not understood elsewhere.

North Korea’s nuclear tests of 2006, 2009 and 2013 at Pungyye-ri birthed an ideological and developmental theme known as the “Byungjin Line”, best translated as “parallelism”.

This concept essentially holds that North Korea’s unencumbered technical, political and social development could only be achieved under the protective umbrella of nuclear capability and research. In the supposed recent nuclear hiatus, some analysts thought the Byungjin Line had all but faded away – but now, with Yongbyon restarted, it’s suddenly returned.

̽��ֱ��restart is, the statement says, “pursuant to the line of simultaneously pushing forward the economic construction and the building of a nuclear force advanced at the historic plenary meeting of the Central Committee of the Workers' Party of Korea” (WPK).

̽��ֱ��rest of the world generally views plenary meetings of the Central Committee of the WPK with bemusement and scorn. But by reiterating the relevance of this particular meeting, and restating the Byungjin’s parallelism, the statement should remind us that the memory of such meetings has weight – and that North Korea’s institutional outlook is far from the myopic charade observers often mistake it for.

From party foundation to nuclear capability

Pyongyang takes an extraordinarily long view when it comes to historiography; North Korea’s self-narrative is replete with commemorative moments and necessary articulations. And the reappearance of Yongbyon is perhaps much less surprising when taken as part of North Korea’s commemorative plans for 2015.

Accordingly, Kim Jong-un’s 2015 New Year message laid out North Korea’s entire developmental and bureaucratic year around a moment of memorial – and not just any moment. Pyongyang has already marked the passing of Liberation Day on August 15, and the Day of Songun on August 25, but a far more important moment awaits: the 70th anniversary of the founding of the WPK, to be marked on October 10.

̽��ֱ��Yongbyon complex nuclear facility. EPA/Digital Globe

Just as North Korea’s governance structure does not represent a truly singular dictatorship but instead pits institutions and agendas against each other, its narrative and commemorative systems are far from monolithic. Instead, they are generated and transmitted by multiple nodes of charisma and authority.

̽��ֱ��activity at Yongbyon and its announcement by the KCNA may or may not be directly connected to the no doubt enormous celebrations that are planned, but they are just as crucial a pillar of Pyongyang’s legitimacy.

While the WPK’s soon-to-be-celebrated birthday will refresh the revolutionary political atmosphere in which North Korea’s regime and system can breathe, Pyongyang’s military and technological infrastructure, including the Korean People’s Army (KPA) and its attendant nuclear capacity, is designed to safeguard North Korea’s patch of the geo-political terrain.

Viewed in this light, North Korea’s “treasured swords” of nuclear mastery are far from the height of geopolitical folly. They are instruments of protection and shared ownership, guaranteeing both the past and future of all both at home and abroad. So it’s only natural that a little sabre-rattling is in order now and then.

Robert Winstanley-Chesters, Post-Doctoral Fellow of the Beyond the Korean War Project, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge

This article was originally published on ̽��ֱ��Conversation. Read the original article.

̽��ֱ��opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author(s) and do not represent the views of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

Robert Winstanley-Chesters, Post-Doctoral Fellow of the Beyond the Korean War Project, discusses the motivations behind North Korea's relaunch of it nuclear weapons complex.

In North Korea’s worldview, nuclear capability is the only thing that can ward off the chaos and collapse that befell Iraq, Libya and Syria

Robert Winstanley-Chesters

(stephan)

North Korea – Pyongyang

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-ShareAlike

International Relations student awarded MBE

fpjl2 — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:00:34 +0000

Damian is among 51 students on the part-time MSt course in International Relations, which is run by the Institute of Continuing Education and the Department of Politics and International Studies at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge. ̽��ֱ��students are of 21 nationalities, working in fields such as international development, diplomacy, business and government. ̽��ֱ��students visit Cambridge for two-week blocks of study four times in their first year and also for two separate weeks during their second year, during which they research a 25,000 word thesis.

Damian first visited Rio as a backpacker in 1994 while studying languages at the ̽��ֱ�� of Edinburgh. After befriending a number of street children on that visit, he then returned to Brazil to volunteer in the Tocantins region. He worked for Amnesty International for 8 years in London, with a focus on South America.

He then worked with the cultural group AfroReggae, promoting culture as a tool to inspire young people living in poverty. During his periods living in Rio, he played a role in assisting the British Consulate with official visits to some of the favelas which have high levels of violence, such as Complexo do Alemão. He co-wrote a book, ‘Culture is Our Weapon’, about these experiences.

‘Although many people find the favelas a frightening place to visit, I have learned a lot over the years about the underlying causes of tensions in these communities,’ recalls Damian. ‘This has led me to try to help official visitors to these areas understand more about them too, in the hope that policies will be implemented to help people living there.’

He has seen major changes coming to Rio, particularly with preparations for the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympics. His next job is with UN-Habitat, on a peace and integration programme for the favelas. ‘In recent years, the police have taken more control over a number of favelas, away from drug dealers and gangs’, explains Damian. ‘Attempts are being made by a number of agencies to introduce infrastructure and social services improvements for these areas.’

̽��ֱ��Masters course in International Relations appealed to Damian because he wanted to broaden his professional understanding and experience. He takes a particular interest in rising powers: countries such as Brazil, Russia, India and China. He plans to write his thesis on the peace and development programme for the favelas and to use learning from the International Relations course to put his experiences so far into context.

A student on the Master of Studies in International Relations course, Damian Platt, has been awarded the MBE for his work in the favelas, or shantytowns, of Rio de Janeiro. Damian was given the award by HRH the Prince of Wales at a ceremony at Buckingham Palace in December.

Damian Platt

Rio Anarkia

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes

̽��ֱ��myth of the Arab Spring

ns480 — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:00:17 +0000

̽��ֱ��western media tends to portray the political uprisings in the Middle East as being broadly motivated by similar reasons and led by similar groups of tech-savvy young people, but surveys of people in the region paint a very different picture, a leading Cambridge researcher will tell a debate on the Arab Spring next week.

Glen Rangwala, a lecturer in the Department of Politics and International Studies, will tell a debate on the Arab Spring at this year's Cambridge Festival of Ideas that although the idea of the ‘Arab Spring’ is accepted by a large proportion of people in Arab countries, the reasons they are aligning themselves with it are very different and have grown more diverse the longer it has gone on. ̽��ֱ��debate is supported by Research Councils UK (RCUK) Global Uncertainties programme.

POLIS has conducted a survey with pollsters YouGov which monitors evolving popular opinion across 18 Arab countries throughout 2011. ̽��ֱ��poll uses a mix of internet-based polling and door-to-door surveys and tracks how the answers have changed since the early days of the Arab Spring.

̽��ֱ��poll shows people's political priorities ranged widely across the region. In Bahrain, the aspiration for civic equality has been the overriding theme around which national views have converged. In Syria, the freedoms of speech and of association dominate, although these two themes barely register in other Arab countries. In Tunisia and Egypt, the first two countries in which long-established governments were overthrown, the research shows personal security has come to dominate popular concerns, among both those who strongly supported the national revolutions and the small proportion who remain unsure of its benefits. Declining personal incomes are central to the support in Yemen for the protest movement.

In most Arab countries, Rangwala says the poll found those who support the Arab Spring most strongly also reported real or anticipated increases in their personal incomes so a financial motive was also evident. Interestingly, in view of media coverage, the poll showed over 35s are slightly more likely to take part in protests than younger people; concern over unemployment is most consistently expressed in countries that have not experienced significant protests so far; and use of the Internet for organising protests varied enormously across the region.

Rangwala says what clearly emerges from the research is the idea of a series of uprisings with different grievances, often different types of participants, and quite distinct types of political aspirations.

He adds: “What appears to unite them is the very idea of the Arab Spring, within which supporters, activists and even opponents of political reform contextualise the protests they see in their own countries. If people identify their national protest movements with the broader region-wide phenomenon of the Arab Spring, the perceived success of a civic uprising in one country will reinforce the estimations of the likelihood of similar achievements at home.”

New research shows true picture of what and who is behind the political uprisings.

If people identify their national protest movements with the broader region-wide phenomenon of the Arab Spring, the perceived success of a civic uprising in one country will reinforce the estimations of the likelihood of similar achievements at home.

Glen Rangwala

RamyRaoof from Flickr

Celebrating in Tahrir Square

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes

Global politics on the agenda at Hay

bjb42 — Sun, 22 May 2011 12:40:28 +0000

How can global organisations be more representative of rising powers? It's one of the big issues of our times as we witness enormous shifts in the world's power dynamics, but it's not a new one.

Amrita Narlikar heads a new centre at Cambridge which uniquely attempts to look at the impact of rising global powers by placing it in a historical as well as political and economic context. She will talk about one aspect of this work – world trade – at the forthcoming Hay Festival [26 May to 5 June], where she joins 17 others ̽��ֱ�� speakers as part of the Cambridge series.

Dr Narlikar's talk will centre on the World Trade Organisation, but will broach wider questions of multilateral reform. “ ̽��ֱ��WTO is a fantastic example of attempts to accommodate the new powers like Brazil, China and India – the opportunities this presents and the unanticipated problems,” she says.

She adds that the WTO is quite distinctive as it has responded fairly well to the rise of new powers compared to other global institutions, such as the UN Security Council. It has given the new powers a major role in high table negotiations and decision-making. “It is one of the few organisations that has responded. You would expect this to make the balance of power fairer, but lots of unanticipated challenges have resulted,” she argues.

One of the positives is a greater diversity of players, but this has slowed down decision-making. Increasing the number of players coming to the table with different viewpoints has created a situation of recurrent deadlock. Trade rounds are taking longer to finish and, as a result, people are becoming more disengaged from the discussions, says Dr Narlikar.

Another problem is that, although there has been a broadening of the decision-makers at the WTO, the actual process of decision-making has not been reformed. It still relies on reaching a consensus on the issues being discussed. “That worked when the GATT talks were a rich man's club, a small group of countries which agreed with each other. It's very different when there is a diversity of countries at the core, with allies in the developing world. Consensus-based decision-making breaks down,” says Dr Narlikar.

Her talk will argue the need for the decision-making process to adapt to a more pluralistic system. “ ̽��ֱ��current system greatly delays the benefits of increasing diversification and creates a very polarised system which is not good if we value stability,” she says.

̽��ֱ��Centre for Rising Powers, which had its inaugural lecture on 12 May, is different from the other new country-specific research centres which has sprung up in response to the rise of the BRICs, says Dr Narlikar. ̽��ֱ��CRP looks at the rise and fall of powers theoretically and historically and how they negotiate and bargain for a place at the power table. “People are behaving as if this transition period has never happened before, but it is a deep-rooted phenomenon and there is always the risk of systemic upheaval,” says Dr Narlikar. “Further, as power transitions seldom happen in a vacuum, the Centre is just as interested in the established powers and other members of the international system that have to deal with, manage, or withstand the rise of new powers.”

̽��ֱ��CRP is very interdisciplinary – its steering committee includes academics with a background in economics, history and political science as well as practitioners. Dr Narlikar highlights that the Centre is committed to cutting-edge research, but with a view to informing and engaging with policy. Other events planned for the future include a panel discussion with former British ambassadors to Brazil, India and China.

Dr Narlikar's talk is just one of a range of sessions being given by Cambridge academics at the Hay Festival. They cover everything from Renaissance costume to liberal ideas about toleration to the history of astronomy. For full details, click here.

Ahead of her talk at the Hay Festival, Dr Amrita Narlikar, Director of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge's new Centre for Rising Powers, discusses how countries like Brazil and China are changing the shape of global politics.

Consensus-based decision-making worked when trade talks were a rich man's club. It's very different with a diversity of countries at the core. 

Dr Amrita Narlikar

scazon

Flag of the United Nations.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes

Power in the balance

bjb42 — Wed, 11 May 2011 11:08:11 +0000

̽��ֱ��Centre for Rising Powers will bring together academics from different subject areas whose research touches on one of the most important questions in international relations: How different powers rise to the top of international politics, and how to predict the impact they will have when they do so?

Its formal launch will take place this Thursday (12 May), with an inaugural lecture given by Joseph Nye, ̽��ֱ�� Distinguished Service Professor at Harvard ̽��ֱ�� and one of the most influential researchers in the field of foreign policy and international relations.

Professor Nye is a former chairman of the US National Intelligence Council, served as Assistant Secretary of Defence for International Security Affairs under President Bill Clinton and currently co-chairs both America’s main cyber security project and the Advisory board of the USC Centre on Public Diplomacy. His lecture will be on the future of US-China relations.

In keeping with his theme, some of the Centre’s research will concern the big, emerging powers of the present day – in particular the so-called BRIC nations of Brazil, Russia, India and China. All four are expected to figure in the list of leading world economies by the year 2050, raising questions about the challenge they will pose to the liberal, western powers who have effectively dictated the course of international politics since the end of the Cold War.

Uniquely, however, the Centre for Rising Powers will also look beyond the immediate cases of the 21^st century. Researchers will also look at historical cases to understand more about how new powers emerge, how they can be accommodated, and the effect that this has on international stability in different cases. ̽��ֱ��rise and fall of Germany in the 19^th and 20^th centuries, or the emergence of the USA or the Soviet Union as global leaders over the course of the 20^th, could in this sense provide lessons for the future as valuable as those which can be drawn from the study of rising powers today.

̽��ֱ��changes which occur as a result of transitions in the world order are felt far beyond established corridors of power. By altering the course of international politics, these countries also impact on the global response to issues such as climate change, trade, international finance, migration, poverty reduction and international security. Far more than diplomacy alone rests on having a clear understanding of their intentions, their negotiating behaviour, and what the consequences of their leadership on such issues are likely to be.

̽��ֱ��findings which emerge from the Centre’s research will be fed back to international policy-makers. ̽��ֱ��new Centre already has links with various think-tanks, policy institutions and private sector organisations, and seminars, conferences and workshops in which research can be communicated back to these groups will be held by the Centre on a regular basis.

Dr Amrita Narlikar, Director of the Centre for Rising Powers, said: “Power transitions are one of the main sources of deadlock and conflict on the world stage, but they also have the potential to act as sources of renewal and change for the better.”

“As a result, the study of how powers rise and how the process should be handled has a direct impact on international co-operation, peace and stability – and on more general values such as efficiency, fairness and justice in the global order. ̽��ֱ��research that the Centre produces will, in some form or other, be of international policy relevance.”

̽��ֱ��inaugural lecture of the Centre for Rising Powers will be given by Professor Joseph Nye in the Old Library, Pembroke College, on Thursday, 12 May, 2011. For more information about the Centre for Rising Powers, its members and its work, please visit the website: https://www.polis.cam.ac.uk/

A new research hub dedicated to the study of emerging powers and how different nations evolve to become leading political forces on the world stage, is being created at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

Power transitions are one of the main sources of deadlock and conflict on the world stage, but they also have the potential to act as sources of renewal and change for the better.

Dr Amrita Narlikar

Radar Communications from Flickr

United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes