Robert O.

Keohane (1941-)
Stanford University

Joseph S. Nye, Jr. (1937-)

Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University

By: MAGNO, Gerald T.

IS 290
PART I: UNDERSTANDING INTERDEPENDENCE
Chapter 1 Interdependence in World Politics
Chapter 2 Realism and Complex Interdependence
Chapter 3 Explaining International Regime Change

PART II: REGIME CHANGE IN OCEANS AND MONEY

Chapter 4 The Politics of Ocean and Money: Historical
Overview
Chapter 5 Complex Interdependence in Oceans and Money
Chapter 6 The Politics of Rule-Making in Oceans and Money

PART III: REGIMES AND TWO-BILATERAL RELATIONSHIPS

Chapter 7 United States with Canada and Australia

PART IV: THE UNITED STATES AND COMPLEX INTERDEPENDENCE

Chapter 8 Coping with Interdependence
“The traditional agenda of international affairs – balance
among major powers, the security of nations – no longer
define our perils or our possibilities… Now we are
entering a new era. Old international patterns are
crumbling; old slogans are uninstructive; old solutions are
unavailing. The world has become interdependent in
economics, in communications, in human aspirations.”
-Henry Kissinger, 1975
 Two major questions that were address by the authors in
the book:
 What are the major pictures of world politics when
interdependence, particularly economic
interdependence is extensive?
 How and why do international regimes change?
 Dependence means a state of being determined
or significantly determined by external forces.
Interdependence, most simply defined, means
mutual dependence. Interdependence in world
politics refers to situations characterized by
reciprocal effects among countries or among
actors in different countries.

 Where there are reciprocal (although not

necessarily symmetrical) costly effects of
transactions, there is interdependence. Where
transactions do not have significant costly
effects, there is simply interconnectedness. The
distinction is vital if we are to understand the
politics of interdependence.
Leading Foreign owners of US Treasury Securities (May 2010)
Nation billions of dollars percentage
PR China  867.7 21.9
Japan 786.7 19.8
United Kingdom 350.0 8.8
Brazil 161.4 4.1
Hong Kong SAR 145.7 3.7
Russia 126.8 3.2
Taiwan 126.2 3.2
Grand Total 3963.6 100

Country Top 3 Trading

Partners (2010)
United States Canada, China,
Mexico
People’s Rep. of US, Japan, Hong
China Kong
Philippines USA, Japan, China
 Power and Interdependence
 Power can be thought of as the ability of an
actor to get others to do something they
otherwise would not do (and at an acceptable
cost to the actor).

 Sensitivity involves degrees of responsiveness

within a policy framework. It is created by
interactions within a framework of policies.

 The vulnerability dimension of interdependence

rests on the relative availability and costliness of
the alternatives that various actors face.
 International Regime Change
 International regime refer to the set of
governing arrangements that affect relationships
of interdependence among actors in IR.
 Changes in international regimes are important.
 In this chapter, the authors constructed another
ideal type of theory, the opposite of realism.
They called it complex interdependence.
Keohane and Nye argues that complex
interdependence sometimes comes closer to
reality than does realism.
 In complex interdependence, the theorists
recognized that the various and complex
transnational connections and interdependencies
between states and societies were increasing,
while the use of military force and power
balancing are decreasing but remain important.
 REALISM AND INTERDEPENDENCE
Realism
Goal of actors Military security will be the
dominant goal.
Instruments of State Military force will be most
policies effective, although economic
and other instruments will also
be used.
Agenda formation Potential shifts in the balance
of power and security threats
will set the agenda in high
politics and will strongly
influence other agendas.
Linkages of issues Linkages will result differences
in outcomes among issue areas
and reinforce int’l hierarchy.
Role of Int’l Roles are minor, limited by
Organizations state power and the
importance of military force.
Complex Interdependence
Goals of state will vary by issue
area. (Oceans, Money, Security,
etc.)
Power resources specific to issue
areas will be most relevant.
Agenda will be affected by
changes in the distribution of
power resources within issue
areas.
Linkages by strong states will be
more difficult to make since
force will be ineffective.
Organizations will set agendas,
induce coalition-formation, and
act as arenas for political action
by weak states
1. Multiple channels connect societies, including:
informal ties between governmental elites as well
as formal foreign office arrangements; informal ties
among non-governmental elites and transnational
organizations.

2. The absence of hierarchy of issues which means,

among other things, that military security does not
consistently dominate the agenda.

3. Military force is not used of by governments toward

other governments within the region, or on the
issues, when complex interdependence prevails.
(Non-use of military force)
In this chapter, to be able to explain why do
international regimes change, the theorists
presented four models based respectively on
changes in:

1. Economic processes;

2. The overall power structure in the world;

3. The power structure within issue areas; and

4. Power capabilities as affected by international

organizations.
 Economic Process Explanation
A model of regime change based on economic
processes would begin with this century’s many
technological and economic changes.
1. Technological change and increases in
economic interdependence will make existing
international regimes obsolete.
2. Governments will be highly responsive to
domestic political demands for a rising
standard of living.
3. The aggregate economic benefits provided by
international movements of capital, goods,
and in some cases labour will give
governments strong incentive to modify or
reconstruct international regimes to restore
their effectiveness.
 Overall power structure explanation
 The basic dynamic is provided by the assertion
that as the power of states changes (that is, as
the structure changes), the rule that comprise
international regimes will change accordingly.

 Issue structure
o Has a similar form of argument about regime
change: the strong states (in an issue area) will
make the rules. A basic assumption of the issue
structure model, however, may be tempted to
draw linkages among issues, such linkages will be
generally unsuccessful. Main premise: Power
resources in one issue area lose some or all of
their effectiveness when applied to others.
 An International Organization Model
 Distributionof capabilities (overall or within
issue areas) among the major actors of world
politics.
 Refer to multilevel linkages, norms, and
institutions between governments. In this sense,
international organization is another type of
world political structure.
 This model assumes that a set of networks,
norms, and institutions, once established, will be
difficult either to eradicate or drastically to
rearrange.
In this chapter, the authors provide historical
overview of the oceans and money issue
areas. They claimed that the Pax Britannica
of the 19th century (1815-1915) is sometimes
seen as the golden age of international
order. International economic
interdependence was governed by regimes
that were largely established and enforce by
the Great Britain.
 This chapter provides an investigation on the
extent to which political processes in each issue
area correspond to the ideal type of complex
interdependence, and whether such an
approximation has changed over time. In the
first half of the chapter, the theorists discussed
how well oceans and monetary politics have
conformed to the three conditions of complex
interdependence. In the second half, they asked
how well their expectations about the politics of
complex interdependence fit patterns of
behaviour in oceans and monetary politics.
 In this chapter, Keohane and Nye provided an
analysis on how the politics of rule-making in
issue areas (money and oceans) affected by
regime change by using the four explanatory
models presented in Chapter 3.
 In this chapter, the authors depart from
using global economic issues to prove the
reality of interdependence. Instead, they
used a different direction by comparing the
relationships between countries. In this case,
they chose Canadian-American relations and
Australian-American relations. Both countries
have been the America’s staunchest allies
since the end of second world war.
 The theorists’ analysis pointed out two major
policy problems: international leadership and
organization.
 Their analysis implies that more attention should
be paid to the effect of government policies on
international regimes.
 Concern with maintenance and development of
international regimes leads us to pay more
attention to problems of leadership in world
politics.
 Focus on contemporary world leadership
stimulates increased attention to problems of
international organization.
 TRENDS TOWARD COMPLEX
INTERDEPENDENCE
 So long as complex interdependence does not
encompass all issue areas and relationships
among all major states, the remaining role of
military force will require sovereign states to
maintain military capabilities.
 So long as the world is characterized by
enormous inequality of incomes among states
– a condition that cannot be change quickly
even on the optimistic assumptions about
economic growth – citizens are likely to resist
dismantling of national sovereignty.
 LEADERSHIP IN COMPLEX INTERDEPENDENCE
 In common parlance, leadership can mean:
(1) to direct or command; (2) to go first and
(3) to induce.
 Three types of international leadership:
 Hegemonic leadership – powerful enough to
maintain the essential rules governing interstate
relation, and is willing to do so.
 Unilateral initiative – going first and setting an
example.
 Multiple leadership - is based on action to
induce other states to help stabilize an
international regime.
 CONCLUSION
 An appropriate foreign policy for the most
powerful state must rest on a clear analysis
of changing world politics.
 The theorists made it clear that their
argument is not that the traditional view of
world politics is wrong.
 Careful analysis is essential for coping
appropriately with the turbulent world of our
time.

“In battle, the sword is mightier than the

pen, but over the long runs, pens guide the
swords.”