Dominance and subordination in world politics: authority, liberalism, and stability in the modern international order

doi:10.1017/CBO9781139680738.004

2 - Dominance and subordination in world politics: authority, liberalism, and stability in the modern international order

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2014

David A. Lake

Edited by

G. John Ikenberry

Show author details

David A. Lake: Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego
G. John Ikenberry: Affiliation:
Princeton University, New Jersey

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

Order is a fundamental feature of world politics, but it is not a constant. It waxes and wanes with corresponding ebbs and flows, yet not in any predictable lunar cycle. Where order exists, as in the so-called developed or first world since 1945, peace and prosperity are possible. In this “Western” system, states have escaped the Hobbesian state-of-nature for an international society. Where order is absent, as in present-day Africa, war and suffering often abound. In the absence of an international civil society, as Hobbes wrote, “life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

Order arises in many forms and from many sources. In Chapter 1, Charles Kupchan emphasizes the normative orientations of leading states. In Chapter 3, John Ikenberry highlights the confluence of American power and liberal ideals. I do not disagree with their perspectives or their core interpretations of modern international orders. In this chapter, however, I examine the role of authority and international hierarchy in the creation and maintenance of international order. In this focus, norms and ideals follow from and facilitate transfers of authority from subordinate to dominant states, but are not primary drivers of international order.

Type: Chapter
Information: Power, Order, and Change in World Politics , pp. 61 - 82

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139680738.004 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Brown, Chris, et al., eds., International Relations in Political Thought: Texts from the Ancient Greeks to the First World War (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 337.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lake, David A., Hierarchy in International Relations (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2009).Google Scholar

Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (University of Chicago Press, 1970).Google Scholar

Gilpin, Robert, War and Change in World Politics (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1981).CrossRef Google Scholar

Waltz, Kenneth N., Theory of International Politics (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979).Google Scholar

Gilpin, Robert, The Political Economy of International Relations (Princeton University Press, 1987).CrossRef Google Scholar

Gilpin, Robert, The Challenge of Global Capitalism: The World Economy in the 21st Century (Princeton University Press, 2000).Google Scholar

Ikenberry, G. John, After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars (Princeton University Press, 2001)Google Scholar

Ikenberry, G. John, Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order (Princeton University Press, 2011).Google Scholar

McKeown, Timothy J., “Hegemonic Stability Theory and 19th Century Tariff Levels in Europe,” International Organization, Vol. 37, No. 1 (1989), pp. 73–91.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dahl, Robert A., “The Concept of Power,” Behavioral Science, Vol. 2, No. 3 (1957), pp. 201–215.CrossRef Google Scholar

Finnemore, Martha, The Purpose of Intervention (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2003)Google Scholar

Williams, Michael C., “The Hobbesian Theory of International Relations: Three Traditions,” in Jahn, Beate, ed. Classical Theory in International Relations (Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 265Google Scholar

Flathman, Richard E., The Practice of Political Authority: Authority and the Authoritative (University of Chicago Press, 1980), p. 30Google Scholar

Lasswell, Harold D. and Kaplan, Abraham, Power and Society (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1950, p. 133Google Scholar

Bernard, Chester L., The Functions of the Executive (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962), p. 169Google Scholar

Krasner, Stephen D., “Global Communications and National Power: Life on the Pareto Frontier,” World Politics, Vol. 43, No. 3 (1991), pp. 336–366.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lake, David, Entangling Relations: American Foreign Policy in Its Century (Princeton University Press, 1999).Google Scholar

Levi, Margaret, Of Rule and Revenue (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1988), p. 52.Google Scholar

Gilpin, Robert, “Economic Interdependence and National Security in Historical Perspective,” in Knorr, K. and Trager, F. N., ed., Economic Issues and National Security (Lawrence, KS: Regents Press of Kansas, 1977), pp. 19–66.Google Scholar

Lake, David, “Leadership, Hegemony, and the International Economy: Naked Emperor or Tattered Monarch with Potential?” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 37, No. 4 (1993), pp. 459–489.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lake, David, “Regional Hierarchies: Authority and Local International Order,” Review of International Studies, Vol. 35 (Supplement S1) (2009), pp. 35–58.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lake, David, “Power Pacifists: Democratic States and War,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 86, No. 1 (1992), pp. 24–37CrossRef Google Scholar

Reiter, Dan and Stam, Allan C., Democracies at War (Princeton University Press, 2002).CrossRef Google Scholar

Martin, Lisa L., Democratic Commitments: Legislatures and International Cooperation (Princeton University Press, 2000)CrossRef Google Scholar

Lipson, Charles, Reliable Partners: How Democracies Have Made a Separate Peace (Princeton University Press, 2003).Google Scholar

North, Douglass C. and Weingast, Barry R., “Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of the Institutions of Public Choice in 17th Century England,” Journal of Economic History, Vol. 49, No. 4 (1989), pp. 803–832.CrossRef Google Scholar

Schultz, Kenneth A. and Weingast, Barry R., “The Democratic Advantage: Institutional Foundations of Financial Power in International Competition,” International Organization, Vol. 57, No. 1 (2003), pp. 3–42.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kahler, Miles, “Conclusion: The Causes and Consequences of Legalization,” in Goldstein, J., Kahler, M., Keohane, R.O. and Slaughter, A.-M., ed., Legalization and World Politics (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001), pp. 291–293.Google Scholar

Lake, David, “Global Governance: A Relational Contracting Approach,” in Prakash, A. and Hart, J.A., ed., Globalization and Governance. (New York, NY: Routledge, 1999), pp. 31–53Google Scholar

Crawford, Neta C., Argument and Change in World Politics: Ethics, Decolonization, and Humanitarian Intervention (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2002).CrossRef Google Scholar

Cowhey, Peter F, “Domestic Institutions and the Credibility of International Commitments: Japan and the United States,” International Organization, Vol. 47, No. 2 (1993), pp. 299–326CrossRef Google Scholar

Tsebelis, George, Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work (Princeton Press, 2002).CrossRef Google Scholar

Kranser, Stephen D., “State Power and the Structure of International Trade,” World Politics, Vol. 28, No. 3 (1976), pp. 317–347Google Scholar

Brawley, Mark R., Afterglow or Adjustment: Domestic Institutions and Responses to Overstretch (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1999).Google Scholar

Lake, David A., Power, Protection, and Free Trade: The International Sources of American Commercial Strategy, 1887–1939 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1988).Google Scholar

Riker, William (“Implications from the Disequilibrium of Majority Rule for the Study of Institutions,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 74, No. 2 (1980), pp. 432–446)CrossRef Google Scholar

Shepsle, Kenneth (“Institutional Arrangements and Equilibrium in Multidimensional Voting Models,” American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 23, No. 1 (1979), pp. 27–60)CrossRef Google Scholar

Riker, ’s (“The Heresthetics of Constitution-Making: The Presidency in 1787, with Comments on Determinism and Rational Choice,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 78, No. 1 (1984), pp. 1–16)CrossRef Google Scholar

Hall, Peter A. and Soskice, David, ed., Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2001)CrossRef Google Scholar

Gourevitch, Peter and Shinn, James, Political Power and Corporate Control: The New Global Politics of Corporate Governance (Princeton University Press, 2005).Google Scholar

Rogowski, Ronald, Commerce and Coalitions: How Trade Affects Domestic Political Alignments (Princeton University Press, 1989).Google Scholar

Hathaway, Oona, “Positive Feedback: The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Industry Demands for Protection,” International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 3 (1998), pp. 575–612.CrossRef Google Scholar

Milner, Helen V., Resisting Protectionism: Global Industries and the Politics of International Trade (Princeton University Press, 1988).Google Scholar

Krasner, Stephen D., Defending the National Interest: Raw Materials Investments and US Foreign Policy (Princeton University Press, 1978).Google Scholar

Lake, David A., “Relational Authority and Legitimacy in International Relations,” American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 53, No. 3 (2009), pp. 331–353.CrossRef Google Scholar

Keohane, Robert O., After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton University Press, 1984)Google Scholar

Bergsten, C. Fred, China’s Rise: Challenges and Opportunities (Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics, et al., 2009).Google Scholar

Mearsheimer, John J., The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York, NY: W.W. Norton, 2001)Google Scholar

Friedberg, Aaron L., “The Future of US-China Relations: Is Conflict Inevitable?” International Security, Vol. 30, No. 2 (2005), pp. 7–45.CrossRef Google Scholar

Beeson, Mark, “Hegemonic Transition in East Asia? The Dynamics of Chinese and American Power,” Review of International Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1 (2009), pp. 95–112.CrossRef Google Scholar

Jacques, Martin, When China Rules and World: The End of the Western World and the Brith of a New Global Order (New York, NY: Penguin Press, 2009)Google Scholar

Halper, Stefan, The Beijing Consensus: How China’s Authoritarian Model Will Dominate the Twenty-First Century (New York, NY: Basic Books, 2010).Google Scholar

Johnston, Alastair Iain, “Is China a Status Quo Power?” International Security, Vol. 27, No. 4 (2003), pp. 5–56CrossRef Google Scholar

Johnston, Alastair Iain, “How New and Assertive is China’s New Assertiveness?” International Security, Vol. 37, No. 4 (2013), pp. 7–48CrossRef Google Scholar

Drezner, Daniel W., “The New New World Order,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 86, No. 5 (2007), pp. 34–46.Google Scholar

Moore, Thomas G. and Yang, Dixia, “Empowered and Restrained: Chinese Foreign Policy in the Age of Economic Interdependence,” in Lampton, D.M., ed., The Making of Chinese Foreign and Security Policy in the Era of Reform. (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2001)Google Scholar

Shirk, Susan, China: Fragile Superpower: How China’s Internal Politics Could Derail Its Peaceful Rise (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2007).Google Scholar