State cartel theory

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The State Cartel Theory (SKT) is a more recent theory formation in the field of international relations (IB) and belongs to the group of institutionalist approaches. So far it has mainly been concretized on the basis of the European Union , but it can be generalized to the international organizations ( IGOs ) formed by states , i. H. all IGOs ​​would then be state cartels . The SKT sees itself as the specialized variant of a general social-scientific cartel system theory .

Terminology

In the state cartel theory, a cartel is generally understood to mean an alliance of rivals . The term is used in an analytical way, not in any sense of disparagement. The basic relationship between states is seen as competition or rivalry , which can be partially eliminated within the framework of international agreements and organizations. The terminology of the doctrine of international cartels comes mainly from the older, historical cartel theory of the time before the Second World War, with the meaning of many of the terms used being moderately expanded in order to be able to understand political and administrative functions as objects or business purposes of an international cartel.

Methodological basics and theory of origin

The state cartel theory is a hybrid creation of two (or more) theories that are combined in a suitable manner.

The theory generation methodology consists of three steps:

  1. The starting point of a country cartel theory is first of all the understanding framework of a theory of international relations that is as differentiated as possible. This could include B. Realism , the neo-functionalist European science or a Marxist theory of imperialism . Their statements about the relationship between the developed industrialized countries are questioned and - under suspicion of ideological bias - put up for discussion.
  2. Another theory, the classic theory of corporate cartels, serves to fill in the gaps and uncertainties that have arisen . This is the cartel doctrine that prevailed in Europe until the end of World War II; however, since the Americans' international fight against cartels, it has been taboo and is considered absurd and apocryphal. In particular, the organizational sociology of the (more mature) cartel theory is used, i.e. its findings on the relationship of the cartelized companies to one another and to the joint bodies formed in the cartel. The classic cartel theory of the economy thus serves as a repair tool to correct ideological deformations in political science, specifically: deformations of the current theories of IB.
  3. In a third step, the transmission results are based on facts, i.e. H. Checked, specified and differentiated on the actually ascertainable international relations.

The end result is a theory that - like the cartel theory of companies - is based on the benefit calculation of the actors under consideration. The state cartel theory is consequently strictly socio-economically determined. Through the method of ideology purification, it is - neither openly nor hidden-subtly - connected with the interests of any really existing great power.

The epistemological prerequisite for the transfer from cartel theory described above is the knowledge that there is a multitude of striking correspondences between states and company associations (the cartels that were previously permitted and were very numerous at the time ), both of an institutional and functional nature. This knowledge is particularly evident on the eve of the First World War promoted the pacifist hope of a so-called ultra-imperialism in the circles of the Second Socialist International . The idea of ​​transferring cartel knowledge to international relations arose at that time, but was hardly implemented.

Central statements and instruments

The historical turning point : This is identified in the systemic crisis of capitalism after the Second World War. The collapse of the anarchic or imperialist world system in 1945 marked the beginning of the comprehensive cartelization of the western world of states. The great material, political and human losses would have led the nations and their ruling classes to the learning result that wars and protectionism as weapons against one another should as far as possible disappear in order to jointly ensure the survival of the western social system. Since the end of the Second World War, the cartel principle to solve interstate differences in interests and relationship problems has been enforced worldwide.

The cartel relationship: A basic instrument of the state cartel theory is the relationship analysis between the examined states. It is important to determine on the one hand their cooperation, the scope of their common interests, on the other hand their competition, the extent of their differences of interests - essentially against contrary idealistic claims of 'friendship' or irrational 'power instinct' assumptions of the conventional theories of IB. Thus the basic relationship between the capitalist states seeking integration can be recognized as a thoroughly rational friend-hostility , as a difficult relationship between cooperation and rivalry. A prime example of this is the Franco-German friendship , for the ambivalence of which numerous examples are given.

The hegemonic analysis : Due to the power superiority of large states - as well as large corporations - a disproportionate ability to assert themselves and, as a result, a privileged position occurs. At the same time, integration generally means entering into dependencies. The analysis of these often complex forms of hegemony inside and outside the respective state connections is of fundamental importance for the state cartel theory and is connected with the analysis of the respective cartel relationships.

Institutional and ideology teaching

The institutional structure : In the company cartels, the general assembly was always the original and main organ of an association. All other organs have serving operational tasks (secretariat, market regulating organs, arbitration board) and are functionally derived from the will of members. This connection can be found in the same way in the state relations: the Council of Ministers as a general assembly , its secretariat, operational commissions ( EU Commission ) and arbitration board / court of justice. Additional organs - in company and state cartels - would be set up as required.

Regarding the democratic content of the European Union : According to the international cartel theory, the European Parliament is a - less important, not really cartel necessary - multifunctional body of the EU: One function is the staging of European democracy; here the democratic aspirations of the parties and citizens of the member states are to be symbolically served or. run into the void. Another function is the creation of more EU expertise by the parliamentarians of the various individual member states, so that national interests can also be introduced at this point. Otherwise the European Parliament could actually improve the decision-making processes of the Community a little through its participation rights; it could influence decisions that the powerful Council of Ministers would otherwise make largely alone and often based on the principle of the lowest common denominator. A significant extension of the rights of parliament posed the system question: cartel or federal state; Such a step to overcome the cartel could only be made with the support or instigation of a strong, dominant group of member states.

The ideology theory : In the replacement of the national-imperialist ideologies before 1945, international organizations resp. State cartels are now an ideology of intergovernmental cooperation: “If war and protectionism as political means are to be eliminated as far as possible, a different style of interaction between the partner states is recommended. [...] The nationalism of earlier days is opposed to an ideology of “international understanding” and “friendship between peoples”. The European spirit is particularly evoked in the EU context. The precepts of international understanding and European community are the oil in the gears of the negotiations of interests in the international cartel. As ideologies, they often gloss over the actual situation, but as appeals or instructions for action they can be extremely valuable [...]. [...] The source of the community ideology in its pure form are the central organs of the EU, its commission and its parliament. "

Functions and results of the integration

The functional typology : The company cartels of earlier times designed markets in their own way, state cartels shape politics. The content and method of the standardization work carried out are not entirely the same, but they are always comparable in analogy . As a result, the functional typology of the classic company cartels can also be applied to integration communities between states, i.e. a classification according to the purpose of the cartel, shown here using the example of the European Union :

  • the European agricultural market has the same set of instruments as a - normally prohibited - production cartel with setting or influencing prices and quantities,
  • the various market regulations of the EU, but also their health and environmental standards , correspond to standardization cartels , e.g. T. also condition cartels ,
  • the regulations on maximum prices for mobile phone calls in Europe represented a supranationally prescribed calculation cartel.

The cartel win : The cooperation in international organizations normally brings the participating states considerable advantages. “The EU's cartel profit - these are the diverse prosperity gains that could be achieved through economic integration and which now weld the member states together like glue. The punishment for smashing integration or attempting national autarky would be an economic crisis, for which the crisis of 1929/33 could only have been a weak precursor. ”There is a mass base in the form of transnational corporations and export-oriented national companies as well as their employees and suppliers that prevent the community from falling apart. On the other hand, cooperation in the international cartel would be made more difficult by distribution conflicts.

The susceptibility to crises : According to the state cartel theory, international integration networks typically develop in a crisis; the European Union is in a permanent crisis. The reasons for this are seen in the conflicting interests between the nations involved, which are difficult to bridge. The EU - as a particularly advanced cartel association - would increasingly come up against a systemic development limit, i. H. could only be sustainably developed through a change of power, through a federal revolution , in which the cartel form would be overcome and a federal state - with its considerable potential for rationalization - would be established.

The equilibrium condition : The international cartel theory describes international organizations as systems for whose stability the participation of all members in the jointly achieved advantages is important. If this win-win condition is permanently violated, international organizations get caught up in critical internal disputes, including refusal or the resignation of individual members.

The relationship to other theories of international relations

The state cartel theory states

  • fierce, socio-economic competition between the capitalist industrial countries,
  • a partial (not complete) solvability of these opposites in the context of international organizations resp. through the cartel principle,
  • state power as the decisive, main mover of international political relations.

Thereby the state cartel theory enters into partial opposition or partial match

  • on neo-functionalist European science and on Jean Monnet's community method : The belief in the solvability of intra-European differences of interests, in the feasibility of an efficient and conciliatory Europe, is rejected by the international cartel theory as naive-idealistic. On the other hand, both theories of integration agree in the importance they attach to institution building in international communities.
  • On the theory of imperialism : The claim of antagonistic rivalry between the capitalist industrialized countries is wrong, at least since the Second World War. These states could very well cooperate sustainably and dispense with open violence in their relationships. State cartel theory and imperialism theory, however, conform to the belief that social interests are socio-economically conditioned and ultimately come from the economy.
  • On theories of international relations with a pro-American tendency: For the hegemonic analysis of a state cartel theory, the consideration of the respective strongest powers - worldwide thus: the USA - is urgent. Eclipsing the United States as a 'good strong power' as in realism ( Morgenthau : the United States did not consistently strive for supremacy) or the methodical deferral of the power aspect as in the main tendency of regime theory and the global governance approach would run counter to a state cartel theory.

Implications of a State Cartel Theory

The advancement of a state cartel theory opens up new perspectives for the IB and related subject areas:

  • According to the SKT, the history of international relations begins with the formation of basically equal states (in the early modern period) and finally ends in a political association that encompasses all states or areas of the world (in a future that is still difficult to foresee). The perspective of a world state as the end point of the long-term development of international relations can be justified in systems theory. This multi-secular view consolidates the historical dimension of IB teaching, which some of its more modern approaches have neglected.
  • The European unification myth, which begins with the political steps of Jean Monnet , explains itself as the unification ideology and community ethos of a cartel that was not formed by companies but by states.
  • Disputes within international organizations, such as distribution and directional battles within the European Union , are only questionable in terms of politics. In terms of cartel theory, they represent the necessary steps to adapt to changed external and internal conditions. Scientists should be able to investigate them in a clarified manner. The equilibrium condition of a win-win constellation (between independent states) sooner or later leads to everyone participating in the advantages of integration, but without being able to prevent additional advantages for individual states.
  • With its roots in classic cartel theory , the SKT also has a pronounced potential in application science. A whole range of cartel forms and trust variants are available to her like a model kit to solve institutionalization problems in today's international organizations. The attempts to rescue from the euro budget crisis, for example, can be seen as the struggle for a supranational trust solution to this problem. The advocates of an essentially still intergovernmental procedure are opposed to more pressing forces. The latter are approaching - tentatively, not yet fully consciously and possibly also not successfully - the trust model of a profit-sharing community, whereby the profit would be a successful rehabilitation of the economy of the crisis states.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Rudolf Hilferding : Das Finanzkapital , Frankfurt 1973 [Vienna 1910], Vol. II, p. 279
  2. ^ Holm A. Leonhardt: The European Union in the 21st century. A state cartel on the way to becoming a state? In: Michael Gehler (Ed.): From the common market to the formation of a European Union. 50 Years of the Treaty of Rome 1957–2007 , Vienna 2009, p. 703
  3. ↑ Ibid., P. 703
  4. ↑ Ibid., Pp. 706-708
  5. ↑ Ibid., Pp. 710-713
  6. ↑ Ibid., Pp. 715-716
  7. ↑ Ibid., P. 703
  8. ↑ Ibid., Pp. 709-710
  9. ↑ Ibid., P. 710
  10. ↑ Ibid., Pp. 687-688
  11. ↑ Ibid., P. 717
  12. ^ Holm A. Leonhardt: Cartel theory and international relations. Theory-historical studies , Hildesheim 2013, p. 195
  13. ↑ Hans J. Morgenthau: Politics among nations: the struggle for power and peace , Boston 2006 (7th ed.), Pp. 67-68

literature

  • Holm A. Leonhardt: The European Union in the 21st century. A state cartel on the way to becoming a state? In: Michael Gehler (Ed.): From the common market to the formation of a European Union. 50 years of the Treaty of Rome 1957–2007 , Vienna 2009.
  • Holm A. Leonhardt: Cartel theory and international relations. Theory-historical studies , Hildesheim 2013.
  • Arnold Wolfers: The cartel problem in the light of German cartel literature , Munich 1931 [can be used as a compendium of classic cartel theory].