1.

National Power: Tangible and Intangible Sources of Power

National power is a crucial concept in international relations, reflecting a state’s ability to

influence global affairs and achieve its national interests. This power derives from a
combination of tangible and intangible elements that enable countries to assert themselves
on the world stage. Understanding both types of sources offers a clearer picture of how
states maintain and enhance their influence in global politics.

Tangible Sources of Power

Geography significantly influences a nation’s power. States like Russia and the United States
benefit from vast territories rich in natural resources, yet these areas also present
challenges, such as defending extensive borders. Meanwhile, smaller countries like
Singapore leverage their strategic locations to exert regional influence despite their size.

Natural Resources play a pivotal role in a nation’s tangible power. Resource-rich states like
Saudi Arabia and Russia hold significant sway in international markets, especially for vital
commodities like oil and gas. However, countries like Japan, lacking in natural resources,
have focused on technology and innovation to build their national power.

Population is another critical source of power. A large population provides a broad labor
force, potential military personnel, and an expansive consumer market. Countries such as
China and India capitalize on their population size to drive economic growth and boost their
geopolitical influence. Nevertheless, the quality of the population—education, health, and
productivity—also plays a significant role in how this power is harnessed.

Economic Development is perhaps the most critical tangible power source. Economically
advanced nations like Germany and the U.S. possess the financial resources to invest in
technological advancement, military capability, and diplomatic efforts. A strong economy
provides a state with the resilience to withstand external shocks and maintain its global
influence.

Military Capacity remains a cornerstone of national power. Nations with advanced military
capabilities, such as the United States, can project power globally, protect national
interests, and influence international decisions. However, a powerful military must be
supported by a strong economy and cohesive society to remain effective in the long term.

Intangible Sources of Power

National Image influences how a state is perceived internationally. A country with a positive
global image, like Canada, can extend its influence through soft power, promoting its values
and interests without resorting to coercion. This type of power fosters diplomacy and global
cooperation.
Public Support is essential for national stability and policy success. When a nation’s people
back the government, the state becomes more resilient and cohesive. Conversely, a lack of
public support can weaken a state’s ability to project power, as seen during the Vietnam War,
when domestic opposition undermined U.S. efforts.

Leadership is another intangible yet vital source of national power. Strong leadership can
unify a country, maximize resource utilization, and craft effective foreign policies. For
example, Winston Churchill’s leadership during World War II exemplified how effective
leadership can turn the tide for a nation even in challenging circumstances.

National power is the result of a combination of tangible and intangible elements. Tangible
factors, such as geography, natural resources, population, economic strength, and military
capacity, provide the foundation of a state’s power. However, intangible elements—national
image, public support, and leadership—are equally critical, shaping how a country leverages
its tangible resources. In today’s interconnected world, a state’s ability to combine both
types of power sources effectively determines its global standing. While tangible power
provides the infrastructure, intangible power often provword be the decisive factor in a
state’s long-term success.

2. Foreign Policy Decision-Making: International and Domestic Perspectives

Foreign policy decision-making is shaped by factors at both the international and domestic
levels, each influencing how a country interacts with the rest of the world.

International Level

Three key factors shape foreign policy at the international level:

1. Geography : A country’s geographic characteristics, such as its size, location, and

access to resources, significantly influence its foreign policy. Island nations like
Japan and the UK focus on naval power due to their reliance on maritime trade, while
landlocked countries, such as Switzerland or Bolivia, are more dependent on their
neighbors for economic access. Geography determines vulnerabilities, strategic
opportunities, and defense requirements.
2. International Legal and Moral Norms**: International law and moral standards help
guide state behavior. While weaker than domestic laws, international treaties and
conventions regulate state actions and help prevent conflict. Countries comply with
international norms, not just out of obligation, but to maintain legitimacy and avoid
isolation. Morality plays a role too; for example, the U.S. refrained from attacking
Cuba during the missile crisis to protect its moral standing globally. This shows how
norms and values impact foreign policy decisions.
 3. Intergovernmental Interactions: The nature of interactions between states, whether
through bilateral or multilateral forums, influences foreign policy decisions.
Countries with similar political and cultural values, like the U.S. and the UK, foster
deeper cooperation. Shared interests in organizations like NATO can enhance
diplomatic and military cooperation. Conversely, strained relations complicate
diplomatic efforts and may lead to conflict.

Domestic Level

At the domestic level, a range of actors and institutions contribute to foreign policy
decisiLeve

1. Political Executives : Heads of state or government, such as presidents or prime

ministers, play a central role in foreign policy. They represent the country in
international matters, lead negotiations, and have the authority to make decisions
during crises, as seen in U.S. presidential military interventions.
2. Bureaucracies : Foreign ministries and government agencies provide critical
information and expertise, guiding decision-making. Bureaucrats often influence
policy direction through their specialized knowledge and strategic assessments.
3. Legislatures : In democratic countries, legislatures have the power to approve
treaties, budgets, and military actions. While executives may have more decision-
making authority in urgent situations, legislatures still play a role in shaping and
reviewing foreign policy.
4. Political Opposition : Political opposition groups and parties challenge government
policies and provide alternative viewpoints. Their role is especially important in
democracies, where their criticism can lead to policy adjustments and increased
public debate.
5. Interest Groups : Interest groups, representing businesses, industries, and advocacy
organizations, lobby for foreign policies that align with their interests. While they are
more influential in domestic matters, their pressure is still felt in foreign policy
decisions concerning trade and international regulations.
6. People : Public opinion impacts foreign policy in democracies, as elected officials are
mindful of voter sentiment. Elections and opinion polls influence decisions,
particularly on high-profile foreign issues, as leaders consider the popularity of their
actions.

From my perspective,a nation’s foreign policy is not just a reflection of its immediate needs
and interests but also a statement of its values and long-term vision. Balancing national
interests with international responsibilities is crucial for maintaining global peace and
cooperation. Countries should strive to align their foreign policies with both domestic
priorities and the broader goals of the international community to foster a more stable and
just world.

3. Functions of diplomacy

Diplomacy plays a crucial role in maintaining peaceful international relations, as outlined in

the Vienna Convention of 1961. Diplomats perform various functions, including
representation, protection, negotiation, information gathering, international cooperation,
and consular services.

1. Representation

A key function of diplomacy is the representation of the sending state in the receiving state.
Diplomats serve as the official channel of communication between governments,
articulating their country’s positions and policies. They represent their state, not individual
leaders, at public events and in official matters. Their role involves maintaining clear,
respectful dialogue to foster understanding and cooperation between nations.

2. Protection

Diplomats are responsible for safeguarding the interests and citizens of their home country
in the host nation. This function becomes critical during conflicts or emergencies when
nationals abroad may face heightened risks. Diplomatic protection involves defending
citizens’ rights, ensuring fair treatment, and intervening when necessary. Diplomats may
engage in protests, legal action, or negotiations to address violations of their citizens’ rights
by the host state or its residents.

3. Negotiation

Negotiation is a traditional and central aspect of diplomacy. Through negotiations,

diplomats resolve disputes, forge treaties, and create agreements on various issues like
trade, security, and cultural exchanges. Effective negotiation requires not only knowledge of
international relations but also persuasive skills and strategic thinking. Diplomats work both
formally and informally to advance their country’s interests while navigating the complex
dynamics of international politics.

4. Information and Reporting

Diplomats act as the “eyes and ears” of their home country by collecting and analyzing
information about the host country’s political, economic, and social landscape. Accurate
reporting is essential for informing foreign policy decisions. In addition to gathering data,
diplomats offer analysis that helps their government understand and anticipate potential
developments. Diplomats must maintain impartiality in their reports and avoid any actions
that could be misconstrued as espionage.

5. International Cooperation

Promoting international cooperation is a vital function of diplomacy. By fostering friendly

relations, diplomats build trust and encourage collaboration between states. This
cooperation can take the form of cultural exchanges, joint economic projects, or multilateral
efforts to address global challenges. Diplomats play an essential role in maintaining a
peaceful international environment by ensuring that bilateral relations are grounded in
mutual benefit and respect.

6. Consular Functions

Consular services are an extension of diplomatic duties, aimed at supporting citizens of the
sending state who are living or traveling abroad. These services include issuing passports,
providing legal aid, and protecting vulnerable groups such as minors or individuals with
disabilities. Consular functions are critical for safeguarding the rights and well-being of
citizens abroad, ensuring they receive assistance in times of need.

Diplomacy, as outlined in the Vienna Convention, involves diverse functions crucial for
maintaining international stability and cooperation. By representing their home country,
protecting citizens, negotiating agreements, gathering information, promoting cooperation,
and offering consular support, diplomats help manage international relations. **From my
perspective,** these roles highlight diplomacy’s importance in fostering long-term, peaceful
global relationships based on trust and mutual respect, essential for a harmonious world.

4. Approaches to Managing Insecurity

The urgent need to manage insecurity has been heightened by the recent increase in military
weapons proliferation and rising military expenditures. Four well-established approaches
exist for managing this insecurity, with two reflecting a liberal theoretical perspective and
two embodying realist thinking. The liberal approaches emphasize multilateral responses,
while the realist approaches focus on individual state power.

Liberal Approaches: Collective Security and Arms Control/Disarmament

Liberal strategies to manage the security dilemma advocate for international cooperation
through institutions that coordinate state actions. **Collective security** rests on several
key assumptions. First, while wars can occur, they should be prevented through military
restraint from all parties involved. This implies that conflicts can be avoided if states exercise
caution. Second, the approach assumes that aggressors can be readily identified and
stopped, although distinguishing between aggressor and victim can often be complex in
practice. Moreover, collective security assumes a moral clarity: aggressors are always
morally wrong, and the international community must unite to counter them. Finally, it
presupposes that aggressors are aware that international actions will be taken against them,
deterring potential aggression.

Historically, collective security has influenced arms control negotiations aimed at reducing
the risk of nuclear conflict. For example, the 1972 Treaty on the Limitation of Antiballistic
Missile Systems (ABM Treaty) prevented the US and the Soviet Union from using missile
defenses as a shield against first strikes. Similarly, the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT
I and II) established ceilings on the growth of both superpowers’ strategic weapons.
However, geopolitical shifts, such as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, hindered the
ratification of SALT II in the US Senate. The Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear
Weapons (NPT), negotiated in 1968, also emerged from the need to address the risks
highlighted by events like the Cuban missile crisis.

Realist Approaches: Balance of Power and Deterrence

In contrast, realist theories emphasize the importance of maintaining a **balance of

power** to ensure stability in the international system. Realists argue that no single state or
coalition should become overwhelmingly powerful, as this imbalance invites aggression. By
maintaining a balanced distribution of power, states deter potential aggressors, knowing
they would face collective opposition.

Throughout history, states have formed alliances to counterbalance rivals, exemplified by

NATO during the Cold War, where the US and its allies aimed to contain Soviet power.
Realists also assert that credible threats of retaliation can effectively deter aggressive
actions. This concept of **deterrence** relies on the assurance of punishment for hostile
behavior, which can manifest through military might, economic sanctions, or diplomatic
isolation. A prominent example of deterrence is nuclear strategy, where the potential for
mutually assured destruction (MAD) prevents states from initiating conflict.

Additionally, military alliances enhance deterrence by demonstrating a commitment to

collective defense. The presence of allies signals that an attack on one will elicit a response
from the collective, strengthening the deterrent posture.

5. Non-state actors

In international relations (IR), national governments are traditionally viewed as the primary
actors. However, the influence of non-state actors—also known as transnational actors—
has grown significantly in recent years. These actors include intergovernmental
organizations (IGOs), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), multinational corporations
(MNCs), and influential individuals, all of which play critical roles in shaping global affairs.
Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs):

States frequently engage in international relations through IGOs, which consist of member
national governments. These organizations serve various functions and range from small
groups to nearly universal entities like the United Nations (UN). Prominent IGOs such as the
UN and the World Trade Organization (WTO) influence international policies, security, and
trade. Regional bodies like the European Union (EU) and the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) also contribute to global governance by facilitating cooperation and
conflict resolution among member states.

Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs):

NGOs are private organizations that operate independently of government control and often
have significant resources. Recognized increasingly as legitimate actors in forums like the
UN, NGOs can serve political, humanitarian, or economic purposes. Organizations such as
Amnesty International and Médecins Sans Frontières advocate for human rights and provide
humanitarian assistance, mobilizing public opinion to influence government actions on
issues like climate change and poverty. Their role in shaping international norms and policies
is vital in addressing global challenges.

Multinational Corporations (MNCs):

MNCs operate across multiple countries and often possess economic power that rivals that
of small states. Companies like Apple and ExxonMobil not only impact global markets but
also influence labor standards and environmental regulations. While MNCs can drive
economic development through foreign investment, they can also exacerbate inequalities
and undermine local governance, as seen historically with the United Fruit Company in
Central America.

Influential Individuals:

Individuals can significantly impact international relations as leaders of movements or

organizations. Nelson Mandela’s leadership in the fight against apartheid and his
subsequent presidency in South Africa showcased the potential for individuals to effect
change. Conversely, figures like Osama bin Laden, through their actions, can alter global
security dynamics, as demonstrated by the September 11 attacks and the ensuing War on
Terror.

In summary, while national governments remain central in IR, non-state actors increasingly
shape global dynamics. Their contributions highlight the complexity of international
relations today, necessitating a more inclusive approach to governance that recognizes the
diverse roles these actors play in addressing global issues.

6. International Political Economy in the age of globalization

International Political Economy (IPE) explores the intricate relationship between economics
and politics in global affairs. Historically, economics played a minor role in international
politics, but globalization has shifted this dynamic, making economic factors central to
understanding international relations. IPE scholars analyze trade, monetary relations,
multinational corporations, and economic integration, revealing how these elements shape
global political dynamics. Three primary theoretical approaches—liberalism, mercantilism,
and Marxism—provide frameworks for understanding these interactions.

1. Liberalism:

Liberalism emphasizes the advantages of free trade and economic interdependence,

advocating for open markets with minimal government intervention. According to liberal
theory, trade fosters cooperation, enhances efficiency, and promotes peace through mutual
dependencies. By lowering trade barriers, countries can specialize based on comparative
advantage, improving overall economic welfare. The establishment of the World Trade
Organization (WTO) and various free trade agreements exemplify liberal principles, aimed at
reducing tariffs and encouraging a more integrated global economy.

2. Mercantilism:

Mercantilism prioritizes national interests and economic self-sufficiency, viewing

international trade as a zero-sum game where one nation’s gain is another’s loss. This
approach often employs protectionist policies, such as tariffs and subsidies, to bolster
domestic industries and maximize exports while limiting imports. An illustrative example is
the United States’ recent tariffs on steel and aluminum, designed to protect domestic
industries from foreign competition and reduce reliance on external sources for critical
materials.

3. Marxism:

Marxist theory examines IPE through the lens of class struggle and exploitation, highlighting
capitalism’s role in perpetuating inequality and imperialism. Marxists contend that global
economic relations favor the capitalist class in developed nations at the expense of the
working class in both the North and South. They critique free trade as a tool for capitalist
exploitation and advocate for systemic reforms. Dependency theory, a modern extension of
Marxism, emerged in the 1970s to explain the wealth gap between the industrialized North
and the developing South, arguing that the North engages in neocolonial practices that
exploit Southern resources.

However, the rise of newly industrialized countries (NICs) in the South, such as the “Asian
Tigers,” challenged dependency theory, demonstrating that these nations could achieve
rapid growth through capitalist methods.

In summary, the study of IPE provides critical insights into how economic and political forces
interact on the global stage. Liberalism, mercantilism, and Marxism each offer unique
perspectives on these dynamics. Understanding these theories is essential for analyzing the
diverse economic strategies pursued by nations in the context of globalization and
addressing contemporary global challenges.

7. Causes of War

Throughout history, approximately 14,500 armed conflicts have resulted in the deaths of
around 3.5 billion people. Understanding the causes of war necessitates a multi-level
analysis, as proposed by Kenneth Waltz. He suggests that while the international system
serves as a backdrop for conflict, individual leaders and state characteristics also play
crucial roles in the outbreak of violence. The war in Yugoslavia serves as a pertinent example
to illustrate these causes at different analytical levels.

1. Individual Level:

At the individual level, the aggressive characteristics of leaders can significantly influence
the path to war. In Yugoslavia, Slobodan Milosevic stoked nationalist sentiments among
Serbs, leveraging historical grievances, such as the atrocities committed by Croats during
World War II. This manipulation of identity and memory created an environment ripe for
conflict, as leaders often misperceive threats or exploit mass emotions for their agendas.
Communication failures between leaders and groups further exacerbated tensions, leading
to a breakdown in dialogue and increasing hostilities.

2. State/Society Level:

The internal dynamics of states also contribute to war. In Yugoslavia, the economic
disparities among the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes fostered resentment. The perception of
economic inferiority among Serbs heightened tensions and fueled demands for greater
autonomy. Domestic politics, including scapegoating and the struggle for resources, played
a role in exacerbating ethnic divisions. As various groups competed for power and resources,
the internal fragmentation of the Yugoslav state set the stage for conflict, particularly after
the recognition of Croatia and Slovenia's independence by several European powers.
 3. International System Level:

At the international system level, the anarchy of the global order significantly impacts the
likelihood of war. In the case of Yugoslavia, the absence of a central arbiter to resolve
competing claims contributed to the escalation of conflict. The lack of effective international
mechanisms to mediate disputes among ethnic groups created a power vacuum. The
prominence of long cycles of war and peace, coupled with shifts in power dynamics, further
fueled instability. As the EU, CSCE, UN, and NATO attempted to intervene, their efforts
underscored the challenges posed by the anarchic structure of the international system.

In conclusion, the causes of war are complex and multifaceted, requiring analysis at
individual, state, and international levels. The case of Yugoslavia exemplifies how aggressive
leadership, internal societal divisions, and systemic anarchy can converge to spark conflict.
Understanding these dynamics is essential for addressing the root causes of war and
fostering more effective conflict prevention strategies in the future.

• One Nation, Two states

When a multistate nation exists, nationalist sentiments create strong pressures to join the
politically separate nation into one state. This often creates conflict because the process of
uniting a divided nation threatens the territorial integrity of one or more of the involved states.
One multistate nation pattern occurs when one nation dominates two or more states. The
cold war created a number of such instances, including North and South Vietnam, North and
South Korea, East and West Germany and the two Yemens.

• Nelson Mandela. He is a leader of the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa
and led the struggle against apartheid and eventually became the country’s first black
president.

• Territorial disputes & island disputes

Arab-Israeli conflict, India-Pakistan war are the examples of territorial conflict. Many of the
world’s other remaining territorial disputes concern the control of small islands, such as
Senkaku island disputes between Japan and China, Spratly islands in the South China Sea
often provide strategic advantages, natural resources, or fishing rights.

• According to United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, it generally allows a
12-mile limit for shipping, and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) covering
 fishing and mineral rights. For example, the case of Myanmar and Bangladesh in
2008.
• Regional organizations (RO)

The European Union (EU) represents Europe, while ASEAN represents Southeast Asia.

• The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was established in 1949 by 12

countries from Europe and North America.The most recent members to join NATO are
Finland in 2023 and Sweden in 2024.
• Consular Functions

The consular functions that are permissible as a matter of international law are listed in
Article 5 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations

• Summit Diplomacy or Personal Diplomacy

The 1979 Camp David Accords signed between Egypt and Israel was accepted as a result of
the negotiations between Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin. From summits between the
main contending powers during the Cold War, to those of today such as the one example is
between the leader of North Korea Kim Jong-un and the former US president Donald Trump
in June 2018.

• Public Diplomacy

The main target audience in public diplomacy is people.

• The membership of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) in South America

5 members

1. Argentina
2. Bolivia
3. Brazil
4. Paraguay
5. Uruguay

1 suspended >>>>> Venezuela

6 associated >>>>> Chile (Protocol of Accession, 2012),Colombia,Ecuador,Guyana,Peru

Suriname

2 observers>>>>New Zealand,Mexico
• the World Trade Organization (WTO), which was founded in 1995 to oversee global
trade regulations.
• An embargo-boycott set of sanctions, organized through the Organization of
American States (OAS), began soon after Castro announced he was a communist in
1961.
• The Marshall Plan was introduced in 1947 with the intention giving a massive financial
aid to Europe and some conditions were set for such aid.
• Waltz finds that all three levels of analysis can be applied to explain the causes of
war.