Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T01:58:06.872Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The “National Interest” and Contemporary World Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

J. Martin Rochester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The “national interest” has proven to be a highly resilient concept, not only in terms of its malleability in the hands of foreign policymakers and various publics but also in terms of its ability to retain currency among several generations of international relations scholars despite repeated efforts to discredit it. There have been several attempts recently to rehabilitate the concept, including one by the Commission on the Organization of the Government for the Conduct of Foreign Policy which recognized that repudiation of the term by academics did not absolve practitioners from their continuing responsibility to define it. However, the problem with recent attempts on the part of scholars as well as practitioners to reformulate the “national interest” is that they fail to take into account adequately the new realities of world politics which have tended to upset the normal calculus. If the identification of “national interests” has defied precise analysis in the past, it is an even more difficult task today.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , January 1978 , pp. 77 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1978

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.)

References

1 George, Alexander L. and Keohane, Robert O., “The Concept of National Interest: Uses and Limitations,” Report of the Commission on the Organization of the Government for the Conduct of Foreign Policy, Appendices, vol. 2Google Scholar. Also, representative of recent writings on the “national interest” are Frankel, Joseph, National Interest (New York, 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Sondermann, Fred A., “The Concept of the National Interest,” Orbis, 21 (1977), 121–138Google Scholar.

2 Sondermann, , “Concept of National Interest,” p. 121Google Scholar.

3 Carr, E. H., The Twenty Years' Crisis (London, 1939)Google Scholar; Morgenthau, Hans J., Politics Among Nations (New York, 1949)Google Scholar.

4 Wolfers, Arnold, Discord and Collaboration (Baltimore, 1952), p. 147Google Scholar.

5 Rosenau, James N., The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy (New York, 1971), p. 243Google Scholar.

6 This critique can be found in Allison, Graham, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis (Boston, 1971)Google Scholar; Hilsman, Roger, The Politics of Policy Making in Defense and Foreign Affairs (New York 1971)Google Scholar; Halperin, Morton and Kanter, Arnold, Readings in American Foreign Policy: A Bureaucratic Perspective (Boston, 1973)Google Scholar; and Halperin, Morton, Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy (Washington, 1974)Google Scholar.

7 See Kissinger, Henry A., American Foreign Policy (New York, 1974), pp. 11–50Google Scholar; Fisher, Roger, International Conflict for Beginners (New York, 1969)Google Scholar;and Morgenthau, Hans J., “The American Tradition in Foreign Policy: An Overview,” in Foreign Policy in World Politics, ed. Macridis, Roy C., 4th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, 1972), pp. 389–412Google Scholar.

8 For example, see Herz, John, “The Rise and Demise of the Territorial State,” World Politics, 9 (1957), 473–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar and “The Territorial State Revisited,” Polity, 1 (1968), 12–34Google Scholar.

9 See Keohane, Robert O. and Nye, Joseph S. Jr, eds., Transnational Relations and World Politics (Cambridge, 1971)Google Scholar and Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition (Boston, 1977)Google Scholar; Coplin, William D., Handelman, John R., O'Leary, Michael K., and Vasquez, John A., “Color It Morgenthau: A Data-Based Assessment of Quantitative International Relations Research” (Paper presented at the International Studies Association Annual Meeting, New York, 03 14–17, 1973)Google Scholar; Brown, Seyom, New Forces in World Politics (Washington, 1974)Google Scholar; Burton, J. W., Groom, A.J.R., Mitchell, C. R., and DeReuck, A.V.S., The Study of World Society: A London Perspective (Pittsburgh, 1974)Google Scholar; Mansbach, Richard W., Ferguson, Yale H., and Lampert, Donald E., The Web of World Politics: Nonstate Actors in the Global System (Englewood Cliffs, 1976)Google Scholar; and Morse, Edward L., Modernization and the Transformation of International Relations (New York, 1977)Google Scholar.

10 See Keohane, and Nye, , Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition; Juda, Lawrence, Ocean Space Rights: Developing U.S. Policy (New York, 1975)Google Scholar; Kihl, Young W., Conflict Issues and International Civil Aviation Decisions: Three Cases (Denver, 1971)Google Scholar; Handelman, John R., Shapiro, Howard B., and Vasquez, John A., Introductory Case Studies for International Relations (Chicago, 1974)Google Scholar; and Aronson, Jonathan, “Multiple Actors in the Transformation of the International Monetary System” (Paper presented at the International Studies Association Annual Meeting, Toronto, 02 25, 1976)Google Scholar.

11 See, for example, Friedheim, Robert L., “The ‘Satisfied’ and ‘Dissatisfied’ States Negotiate International Law,” World Politics, 18 (1965), 20–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 For the best statement of this view see Knorr, Klaus, On the Uses of Force in the Nuclear Age (Princeton, 1966)Google Scholar and The Power of Nations (New York, 1975)Google Scholar.

13 The concept of “polyarchy” is discussed in Dahl, Robert A., Who Governs: Democracy and Power in an American City (New Haven, 1961)Google Scholar and Rosenau, James N., “Pre-Theories and Theories of Foreign Policy,” in Approaches to Comparative and International Politics, ed. Farrell, R. Barry (Evanston, 1966), pp. 29–92Google Scholar.

14 Rosenau, James N., ed., Linkage Politics (New York, 1969)Google Scholar. The increased interconnectedness of national societies is delineated in Inkeles, Alex, “The Emerging Social Structure of the World,” World Politics, 27 (1975), 467–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 See Deutsch, Karl W. and Eckstein, Alexander, “ National Industrialization and the Declining Share of the International Economic Sector, 1890–1959,” World Politics, 13 (1961), 267–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Hart, Jeffrey, “Graph Theoretical Models of International Politics” (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1974), chap. 7Google Scholar.

17 Feld, Werner J., Nongovernmental Forces and World Politics (New York, 1972)Google Scholar.

18 Nye, Joseph S., “Regional Institutions,” in Regional Politics and World Order, eds. Falk, Richard A. and Mendlovitz, Saul H. (San Francisco, 1973), pp. 78–93Google Scholar.

18 See Bozeman, Adda B., The Future of Law in a Multicultural World (Princeton, 1971)Google Scholar.

20 See Bhagwati, Jagdish N., “Economics and World Order from the 1970's to the 1990's: The Key Issues,” in Economics and World Order from the 1970's to the 1990's, ed. Bhagwati, (New York, 1972), pp. 1–28Google Scholar.

21 Representative of this viewpoint is the writing of Falk, Richard A., This Endangered Planet (New York, 1971)Google Scholar and Brown, Lester R., World Without Borders (1972)Google Scholar.

22 Olson, Mancur, The Logic of Collective Action (Cambridge, 1965)Google Scholar.

23 Olson, Mancur and Zeckhauser, Richard, “An Economic Theology of Alliances,” in Economic Theories of International Politics, ed. Russett, Bruce M. (Chicago, 1968), pp. 25–49Google Scholar.

24 Wenk, Edward J., The Politics of the Oceans (Seattle, 1972)Google Scholar; and Cowhey, Peter F., Hart, Jeffrey A., and Schmidt, Janet K., “The Theory of Collective Goods and the Future Regime of Ocean Space” (Paper presented at the International Studies Association Annual Meeting, New York, 03 14–17, 1973)Google Scholar.

25 Olson, Mancur, “Increasing the Incentives for International Cooperation,” International Organization, 25 (1971), 866–874CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Frolich, Norman, Oppenheimer, Joe A., and Young, Oran R., Political Leadership and Collective Goods (Princeton, 1971)Google Scholar; Russett, Bruce M. and and Sullivan, John S., “Collective Goods and International Organization,” International Organization, 25 (1971), 845–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Ruggie, John G., “Collective Goods and Future International Collaboration,” American Political Science Review, 66 (1972), 874–893CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Trend data can be found in Charles Kegley, W. Jr, and Rochester, J. Martin, “Assessing the Impact of Trends on the International System: The Growth of Intergovernmental Organizations,” in A Multi-Media Introduction to International Politics, eds. Coplin, William D. and Kegley, (Chicago, 1971), pp. 401–412Google Scholar.

27 See Rosenau, James N., “Adaptive Politics in an Interdependent World,” Orbis, 16 (1972), 153–173Google Scholar.

28 Waltz, Kenneth N., “The Myth of National Interdependence,” in The International Corporation: A Symposium, ed. Kindleberger, Charles P. (Cambridge, 1970), pp. 205–223Google Scholar.

29 Morse, Edward L., “The Politics of Interdependence,” International Organization, 23 (1969), 311–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar and “Interdependence in World Affairs,” in World Politics: An Introduction, eds. Rosenau, James N., Thompson, Kenneth W., and Boyd, Gavin (New York, 1976), pp. 660–681Google Scholar; Rosecrance, Richard N. and Stein, Arthur, “Interdependence: Myth or Reality?” World Politics, 26 (1973), 1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nye, Joseph S. Jr, “Independence and Interdependence,” Foreign Policy, 22 (1976), 130–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Katzenstein, Peter J., “International Interdependence: Some Long-Term Trends and Recent Changes,” International Organization, 29 (1975), 1021–1934CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Mansbach et al., The Web of World Politics: Nonstate Actors in the Global System.

31 Simmonds, Kenneth, “Ethnocentric and Geocentric Multinational Corporations,” in World Business: Promise and Problems, ed. Brown, C. C. (New York, 1970)Google Scholar.

32 Brown, World Without Borders.

33 Keohane, and Nye, , Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition, p. 4Google Scholar.