Superficially, the liberal view of the nature of the state is similar to realism (see chapter 2), in so far as liberals accept that the defining characteristic of the state is sovereignty. Liberals would also agree with realists that the basic characteristics of the state are that it has a territory, a people and a govern- ment. Liberals regard the state as, at best, a ‘necessary evil’. As can be inferred from the earlier discussion, liberals also make distinctions between different kinds of states. Authoritarian or tyran- nical regimes whose power is unchecked are likely to be more belligerent, having little respect for human rights or regard for human suffering. In contrast, in liberal-democratic countries the state is held to be essentially a ‘neutral arbiter’ between competing interests in an open and pluralistic society. The state provides a framework (legal and political) in which it is possible to go about one’s everyday business in the knowledge that one will be secure from harm, that contracts of all kinds will be upheld and that people will be able to pursue their varied aims and interests without restriction, providing that they do not, in consequence, harm others.
The use of the word ‘regime’ in IR should be distinguished from a regime in this specific context, meaning the rule of a particular leader or government, for example Saddam’s regime. See the Glossary of key or problem terms for a full explanation.
This notion of the need to check the power of the state gives rise to the liberal concept of pluralism. In its original usage the term ‘pluralism’ referred to the belief in the need to distribute political power through several institutions, none of which is sovereign. Some liberals believe that the state to some extent reflects the interests and concerns of interest groups. In political systems dominated by parties this is to some extent inevitable. Moreover, there are also powerful élites within the government bureaucracy, the military and so on which might work to advance their own interests. However, lib- erals deny that the state reflects the interests of one, overwhelmingly dominant social class, or any one élite group. It is absolutely central to liberal thought that the state is seen as an autonomous body. In this context autonomy means that the state is fair and impartial, functioning as a neutral arbiter in disputes and policing the citizen body. This differs in fundamental ways from realist views, but also from structuralist and some feminist views, which you will encounter in chapters 2, 3 and 6.
Liberals are careful to distinguish between the state (which consists of the various arms of gov- ernment, the police force, armed services and the law courts as well as a given territory and population) and civil society. Civil society refers to those areas of human life where individuals engage in collective action and activity, but which are outside the realm of state action or not directly within the purview or control of the state. So, for example, a vibrant civil society might be one in which people form associations like sports clubs or trade unions, or engage in social, cultural or ‘independent’ political activities, such as joining Greenpeace or Amnesty International.
Civil society: civil society refers to those areas of human life where individuals engage in collective
action and activity, but which are outside the realm of state action or not directly within the purview or control of the state.
Having said that state and (civil) society are clearly separated in liberal thought, liberals recognise that the state and civil society interact. The state provides a regulatory framework in which such activity takes place. For example, a ‘social club’ might be required to gain a licence to operate. The police might even monitor certain activities. Also, in a democracy at least, elements of civil society will try to actively influence the activities of the government – a central arm of the state.
international relations. Just as the separation of powers implies that the essence of sovereignty is dif- ficult to pin down or locate, contemporary liberals argue that the state can cede some elements of its sovereignty to other bodies, such as, for example, the United Nations or the European Union. Furthermore, actors such as multinational corporations (MNCs), international and regional institu- tions – for example, the United Nations, FIFA, the Organisation of African Unity – international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) like Greenpeace or Amnesty International, new social movements and even terrorist groups can also be said to be influential. Liberal pluralists were the first to significantly expand the purview of International Relations theory to ‘actors’ other than states and ‘processes’ other than foreign policy, war or diplomacy, which had dominated realist scholarship (see chapter 2). Cologne Fiesta 176,000 Scorpio/Granada 99,000 (+petrol engines & transmissions) Swansea Axles Bridgend Engines Southampton Transit van 71,000 LisbonAzambuja P100 pickup 7,000 Transit van 7,000 Bordeaux Transmissions & transaxles Düren Transmissions & rear axles
Genk Sierra 325,000 Transit van 73,000 Karmann- Osnabrück Cosworth 20,000 Merkur 7,000 Saarlouis Escort/Orion 307,000 Ford of Europe vehicle assembly 1988 (incl. major components plants) Total vehicle
production 1.792 m
Halewood
escort/Orion 225,000 inc. Escort van 44,000 (+ transmissions and transaxles)
Dagenham
Fiesta 94,00 Sierra 100,000
(+ diesel & petrol engines & KD kit operation)
West Berlin
Plastic components
Valencia
Fiesta 154,000 inc. Fiesta van 15,000 Escort/Orion 128,000 (+ engines)
Figure 1.3 Where does a Ford car come from?
Original source: The Financial Times, 25 January 1989.
Taken from: B. Hocking and M. Smith (1995), World Politics, An Introduction to International Policies, 2nd edn, London: Prentice-Hall/Harvester Wheatsheaf, p. 101.
Pluralism implies or denotes a diffusion of power. In liberal democracies power is held to reside with the people, in so far as the people are able to vote periodically to remove political leaders from office. However, the conception of ‘people power’ goes beyond the ability periodically to elect or remove governments from office. As we noted above, in a developed democracy with a strong civil society we might also expect to see people more actively involved in politics through their member- ship of social movements or support for the work of NGOs. In Western societies it is common for people who feel strongly about an issue to engage in lobbying activities designed to influence the decision-making process. Others prefer to work outside the formal structure of government, and take part in demonstrations. As the modern state has ‘intervened’ in more and more areas of human life, it has greatly facilitated this kind of politics.