Chapter 1: Defining International Relations Through Global Disasters and Film

1.1: Defining International Relations

When we think about global politics, international relations (IR) often comes to mind, even if we’re not aware of it. IR is the political science field that studies how countries interact, why they sometimes work together, and why they sometimes clash. But it’s not just about states and politicians making deals or going to war; IR also involves non-state actors like multinational corporations, international organizations, and even non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that help shape the world. Whether it’s negotiating climate change policies, managing the flow of goods across borders, or dealing with crises like pandemics, international relations gives us a framework to understand who the main players are, what they want, and how they go about achieving it. By studying IR, we can get a clearer picture of why the world works the way it does – and maybe even predict where it’s headed next.

To start, let’s break down exactly what we mean by international relations. IR is not just about individual countries but about the entire international system – a vast network of interactions that includes states, organizations, and other groups with interests that cross borders. This system is dynamic, with countries competing, negotiating, and collaborating to achieve their goals. However, IR is also about understanding the challenges that arise when so many players are pursuing different goals. From conflicts over resources to alliances formed in the face of common threats, IR provides insight into how global events unfold and why international cooperation is often more complex than it seems. For example, the United Nations, which attempts to facilitate cooperation on a global scale, illustrates the practical side of IR as an international organization working to manage the behavior of states and other actors. As we go further, we’ll see how the ideas and goals of these different players influence their interactions in the global system.

One of the defining features of our world today is globalization– the growing interconnectedness of economies, societies, and cultures on a worldwide scale. This interconnectedness means that what happens in one part of the world affects people across the globe, from economic booms and busts to cultural trends and public health crises. Globalization has also brought unique challenges: while it fosters economic growth and the spread of ideas, it can also lead to competition, inequality, and environmental issues that no single country can solve alone. The 2008 global financial crisis is an example of this interconnectedness; what started as a housing market crash in the United States quickly led to economic turmoil around the world, highlighting both the benefits and the vulnerabilities of a highly globalized system. As countries become more interconnected, IR scholars and policymakers alike need to understand how globalization shapes state behavior and the broader international system. Next, we’ll look at what drives countries in their decision-making – something often referred to as their national interest.

National interest is a core concept in international relations, shaping how states approach both cooperation and conflict. A country’s national interest usually includes goals like security, economic prosperity, and influence on the world stage. For example, a state might prioritize its security by building a strong military, ensuring stable alliances, or securing resources it needs. Economic interests, meanwhile, could lead a country to negotiate trade deals or join international economic organizations like the World Trade Organization. For example, when the United States and China interact on trade issues, each country is trying to protect its own national interests, balancing economic growth with security concerns. National interests can align, creating opportunities for cooperation, or they can clash, leading to tensions or even conflict. Understanding national interests helps us see why countries often make the decisions they do, whether they’re aiming for cooperation or acting to secure their position on the global stage.

Levels of Analysis

Finally, how one goes about studying IR matters. Imagine you’re watching a superhero movie. From the sky, you see cities clashing, alliances forming, villains threatening the global order—classic international chaos. But zoom in, and you’ll notice governments making strategic decisions. Zoom in even further, and you’ll find one anxious scientist-turned-hero wrestling with guilt and duty. That, in a nutshell, is what the levels of analysis in international relations are all about: different perspectives for understanding why things happen in world politics. Levels of analysis help scholars and students break down complex international events by examining them from three vantage points: the system, the state, and the individual. Each level focuses on different actors and causal mechanisms. This framework matters because the level of analysis we choose shapes not only how we explain global events, but also what kinds of solutions we propose. Miss the forest for the trees—or the trees for the forest—and you might end up with a deeply flawed understanding of world politics.

The system-level of analysis takes the widest lens, focusing on the structure of the international system as a whole. This level looks at how the distribution of power, the absence of a central authority (anarchy), and global norms influence state behavior. Scholars working at this level often emphasize how the system constrains what states can do, regardless of their internal makeup. For example, during the Cold War, many realists—most notably Kenneth Waltz—argued that the bipolar system, defined by two superpowers, created a stable balance of power. It didn’t matter if the U.S. was a democracy and the USSR a communist state; what mattered was how the two powers interacted within an anarchic system. In contrast, the state-level of analysis zooms in to examine domestic factors like political institutions, regime types, economic systems, and national ideologies. This level explains state behavior by looking at what’s going on inside countries. Take the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq: a state-level analysis might focus on the influence of neoconservative ideology within the Bush administration, public opinion after 9/11, or the way American democratic institutions shaped foreign policy decisions.

Finally, the individual-level of analysis focuses on the roles that specific people—especially leaders—play in international politics. This level considers psychological traits, belief systems, perceptions, and personal experiences. It’s a more human-scale approach to IR, and often reveals how decisions are influenced not by structures or institutions, but by the quirks and judgments of individuals. A classic example is the Cuban Missile Crisis, where scholars like Robert Jervis have shown how the crisis was shaped by the personal decisions and risk perceptions of John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev. Their ability to interpret signals, avoid escalation, and manage fear helped the world narrowly escape nuclear war. Each level of analysis has its strengths, but the most insightful IR explanations often combine them—linking the global system, state dynamics, and individual choices into one interconnected narrative. Think of it as switching camera angles in a documentary about world affairs: each angle tells a different part of the story.

As we can see, international relations is not only about the obvious decisions and interactions but also about the hidden dynamics that shape how states pursue their goals, build alliances, or enter conflicts. From the broad reach of globalization to the specific national interests that guide state actions, IR provides us with the tools to understand the motivations and forces at play in global politics. In the next sections, we’ll dive deeper into these concepts and explore how countries navigate the complex landscape of international relations.