This October, one major headline filled German newspapers. The American “National Security Agency” (NSA) were hacking the mobile of Bundeskanzler Merkel. The country was outraged. Nobody could understand why the Americans collect information, under the justification of “War against terror”, from a declared ally.
Do we not live in an international society where friends can trust each other and their acts are defined by morality? Is there maybe an un-spoken rule, that anticipates such behaviour or a conceived common set of beliefs, which appear when two states start an interaction?
In this essay I will assess critically Hedley Bull´s idea of “international society”, which could account for the spy attack by the USA against Germany. Firstly, I will explain the statements of the “English School”, which Hedley Bull assigns himself to. After this, I will distinguish it from other International-Relation (IR) theories like Realism and Liberalism. Furthermore I want to interpret the meaning of “international society”. I want to show how it is built up (historically), how it is ruled and how this approach solves the problem of anarchy. After that I am going to criticize the idea of the “international system”. In the end I will summarize and evaluate if this approach in international relations is valid or not. Before I start I have to give some background information.
The term “English School” was coined in the 1970s to describe a group of predominantly British, or British inspired, writers for whom “international society is the primary object of analysis(Linklater et al 2013,88). Hedley Bull, a former professor for IR in Oxford, was one of the most influential early members of the “English School”.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. The main statements of the “English school”
II.1. Realism
II.2. Liberalism
III. International society
III.1. International System or “the system of states”
III.2. International society
IV. Central categories
IV.1. Morality
IV.2. Norm
IV.3. Rights and Justice
V. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This essay provides a critical assessment of Hedley Bull’s concept of "international society" by analyzing its theoretical foundations, comparing it with other International Relations theories, and evaluating its ability to explain contemporary international behavior and the persistence of anarchy.
- The theoretical positioning of the "English School" between Realism and Liberalism.
- The distinction between the "International System" and "International Society".
- The analysis of fundamental categories such as morality, norms, and rights.
- A critical evaluation of the effectiveness of shared norms in governing state behavior.
- The limitations of the international society approach in the face of rational state interests and security concerns.
Excerpt from the Book
III.2. International society
I want to assert, that the international system as matrix of international action. Alderson& Hurrell (2000) record that “an international society presupposes the existence of an international system”. “A society of states exists when a group of states, conscious of certain common interests and common values, form a society in the sense that they conceive themselves to be bound by a common set of rules and share in the working of common institutions”(Bull 1977,13). This Essay assumes that there are some problems with this argument because states have different assumptions of human rights or other core-believes of international relations. E.g. the western attitude towards the position of woman is very different to the attitude in Islamic countries. (Hurrell 1998,20) identify three elements on which international society can rest: power, common interest and common values. The current problem of anarchy is solved because all actors are bounded by moral standards (Linklater 2013, 88). The essence of the doctrine is that states may never succeed in eliminating war but they have reached an important agreement (like moral standards) about how to control force. States are not condemned to compete for power or security; indeed, they form a society that preserves a remarkably high level of order in the anarchy (Linklater 2010,2).
Summary of Chapters
I. Introduction: The introduction outlines the motivation for the essay, citing the NSA surveillance of government officials as a prompt to evaluate the validity of Hedley Bull’s theory of international society.
II. The main statements of the “English school”: This chapter defines the English School as a "third path" or "Via Media" that incorporates elements of both Realism and Liberalism.
II.1. Realism: This section details the Hobbesian roots of Realism, emphasizing power and unitary state actors, and highlights the English School's departure from these views regarding the possibility of international cooperation.
II.2. Liberalism: This section explores the Liberal focus on internal state structures and non-state actors, noting how these influences contribute to the English School's perspective on international rules.
III. International society: This chapter introduces the central intellectual framework of Hedley Bull regarding the nature and possibility of order in global politics.
III.1. International System or “the system of states”: This section defines the international system as a precursor to international society, characterized by state contact and shared institutions.
III.2. International society: This section expands on the requirements for an international society, including shared values and common rules, while questioning their consistency across diverse cultural contexts.
IV. Central categories: This chapter critiques the international society framework by examining its fundamental constitutive units.
IV.1. Morality: This section analyzes the ambiguity of morality within the English School, distinguishing between logics of appropriateness and consequences.
IV.2. Norm: This section discusses the role of norms in maintaining peace and security and the challenges inherent in their universal application.
IV.3. Rights and Justice: This section examines the tensions between natural state rights and the collective obligations imposed by membership in an international society.
V. Conclusion: The conclusion evaluates the overall viability of Bull’s concept, suggesting that while it is a desirable approach, it remains overly optimistic regarding the strength of morality over state interest.
Keywords
International Society, English School, Hedley Bull, Realism, Liberalism, Anarchy, State of Nature, Morality, International Norms, Global Order, International System, Sovereignty, Rationalism, Justice, Human Rights
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this essay?
The essay critically evaluates Hedley Bull's concept of "international society" to determine its explanatory power in modern international relations.
What are the primary theoretical themes discussed?
The core themes include the intersection of Realism and Liberalism within the English School, the nature of anarchy, and the role of morality and norms in state cooperation.
What is the research question driving this study?
The study seeks to understand if the concept of an international society can effectively account for international events, such as espionage between allies, where national interest seems to override shared moral standards.
Which scientific method is applied here?
The work utilizes a theoretical and comparative analysis of existing international relations literature, applying these concepts to specific case scenarios to test their validity.
What does the main body cover?
It covers the definition of the English School, the distinction between international systems and societies, and an investigation into the central categories of morality, norms, and justice.
What are the characterizing keywords of the work?
Key terms include International Society, English School, Anarchy, Morality, International Norms, and Sovereignty.
How does the author define the "English School" as a "Via Media"?
The author explains that the English School adopts a "middle way" by recognizing the anarchic environment described by Realists while accepting the possibility of cooperation and moral restraint suggested by Idealists/Liberalists.
Why does the author use the NSA's hacking of Angela Merkel as an example?
It serves as a practical example to test whether moral standards and international norms are strong enough to override the perceived "relative gains" sought by powerful states through surveillance.
What is the author's final evaluation of Bull's theory?
The author concludes that while the approach is conceptually valid and desirable, it is "hopelessly over-optimistic" and fails to account for the persistent influence of insecurity and the "bottom-up" challenges to international institutions.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Andreas Michaelis (Autor:in), 2013, Hedley Bull´s idea of "international society", München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/273553
