Framing global politics

The study of power — who has it, how they use it and who decides — beyond any single country.

A matter about how power is used or shared that affects people and that people disagree about.

Climate change, migration, war, poverty or human rights (any).

Global, international, regional, national and local.

The same issue involves different actors and different power at each level.

Power (the master concept), sovereignty, legitimacy and interdependence.

Power — everything in the course links back to it.

People see and judge the same issue differently — there is disagreement.

States disagree over who cuts emissions and pays, and it pulls in many actors at every level (e.g. the Paris Agreement).

Explore different perspectives on an issue AND evaluate them, backed by a real case study.

An organised group that seeks to win government power through elections — it wants to be the government.

A party wants to WIN power; a pressure group only wants to INFLUENCE the government's decisions.

A government formed by two or more parties working together, common when no single party wins a majority.

A set of ideas about how society should be run — a party offers a whole ideology, not just one issue.

When it wins and forms a government — then its ideology shapes national and foreign policy.

How a country acts toward other countries — which the governing party helps decide.

Joining European governments (e.g. Germany 2021), they pushed for faster climate action at home and abroad.

The party in power decides how a country acts in the world — its alliances, votes and foreign policy.

They are powerful only once in government, are mostly domestic, and are driven by the next election.

Ideologies like populism can spread between countries, and parties group together internationally.

The government's — a party acts on the world stage through the state it governs.

A group that tries to influence government decisions without seeking to win power itself.

A party wants to WIN power and be the government; a pressure group only wants to INFLUENCE the government.

A group that defends the shared interests of its members, such as a trade union or business association.

A group that promotes a cause or value for everyone, such as an environmental or human-rights group.

Trying to influence decision-makers, often with money and expertise, to shape what they decide.

A group with close, trusted access to decision-makers, often invited to advise government.

A group without close access that pushes for change through protest and the media.

By lobbying at events like UN climate summits, where industry and environmental groups pull in opposite directions.

Expert knowledge, a sharp focus, insider access, and the ability to mobilise members and money.

Influence is unequal — a well-funded lobby can be far louder than a small grassroots group.

Pressure groups have influence but not power — they shape decisions but do not make them.

An individual who holds or shapes political power — often a head of state or head of government.

From office (formal position), personal skill and charisma, and the decisions they make.

A personal magnetism that inspires people and wins loyalty — one source of a leader's power.

When a leader personally builds relationships and support with other countries, e.g. through speeches and meetings.

Institutions and law, other actors (parties, courts, allies), and circumstances they did not choose.

In 2022 he stayed and used personal diplomacy to rally dozens of countries to support Ukraine against Russia.

The power of an individual to make a difference through their own choices.

The systems and conditions (institutions, economies, history) that shape and limit what people can do.

Do leaders shape events (agency), or do circumstances and systems shape leaders (structure)? Usually both.

Yes — through decisions and personal diplomacy — but always within limits set by circumstances.

Leaders make real choices (agency) but always within structures — the two work together.

A setting where actors meet to talk, coordinate and try to agree.

A forum with set rules, membership and the power to take binding decisions (e.g. the UN General Assembly, WTO, COP).

A loose forum with no fixed rules or binding decisions (e.g. the G7, G20, or Davos).

It has no power of its own — its influence comes from the actors who meet there and what they agree.

A group of about 20 major economies that meets to coordinate the world economy — an informal forum.

It has no treaty, HQ or binding power, yet its summits coordinate the major economies — as in the 2008 crisis.

A joint statement issued after a summit — what informal forums produce instead of binding law.

Clear rules, wide membership, binding decisions, and more legitimacy — but they can be slow.

Flexibility, speed, and frank relationship-building — but they are exclusive and non-binding.

No power of their own — they are only as strong as what their members agree.

Formal forums are more legitimate and can bind but are slow; informal forums are fast and frank but exclusive and non-binding.

The news outlets and platforms that inform people and shape opinion — from press and TV to social media.

Traditional mass media (newspapers, radio, TV) and social media (platforms where anyone can post).

The media seen as a watchdog that holds those in power to account by exposing wrongdoing.

Choosing which stories to tell, and so shaping what the public and governments pay attention to.

It can inform, connect and hold power to account — or mislead, divide and be used as a weapon.

It helped organise the 2011 Arab Spring protests, but the same platforms spread disinformation and propaganda.

False or misleading information, whether or not it is spread on purpose.

False information spread deliberately to deceive people.

Information, often biased, used to promote a particular cause or point of view.

An online space where people mostly hear views they already hold, which can deepen divisions.

Who controls it? Free media can check power; state-run or manipulated media can serve it.

Actors beyond the main types — individuals, philanthropists/foundations, experts, religious actors and violent non-state actors.

A wealthy person who gives large sums to causes — a source of private power in global politics.

A network of experts whose knowledge shapes policy, such as climate scientists advising governments.

An armed group outside the state that uses force, such as a terrorist or insurgent group.

It spends billions on global health, funding more than many governments in some areas and shaping the agenda.

Different things: money, expertise, moral authority, attention — or force.

Many are unelected and unaccountable, money can buy outsized influence, and some (violent groups) are illegitimate.

Ask what power it brings (money, expertise, moral authority, force) and whether it is legitimate (elected? accountable? just means?).

Through moral authority — faith leaders and groups (like the Pope) can shape opinion and values.

Through trusted evidence — their knowledge shapes what policymakers believe is possible or wise.

No — none of them holds sovereignty; their power is money, expertise, moral authority or force.

State vs non-state — only states have sovereignty and can make binding law.

Non-state actors can have huge power (money, numbers, attention), but only states have authority — the right to make law.

The supreme right to govern and make binding law — only states hold it.

Sovereignty (only states), the type of power they bring, and whether they aim to hold or only shape power.

States negotiate and sign, IGOs host, NGOs campaign, companies lobby, movements protest, scientists advise, media reports, foundations fund.

Non-state actors set the agenda and pressure; states hold the pen — only they sign the binding deal.

No — they have power to influence, but only states have the authority to make binding law.

Only they hold sovereignty, make law, sign treaties and hold UN seats; other actors still need states to act.

Companies rival states economically, NGOs and movements set the agenda, and cross-border problems escape single states.

On war and law states dominate; on climate and technology non-state actors loom large.

States are still the most important actor because of sovereignty, but their power is shared and challenged.

A person or group that can act — make a decision or take action.

Anyone affected by an issue, even if they have little power to act on it.

In an oil pipeline: the government and company are actors; the local villagers affected are stakeholders.

State vs non-state — states have sovereignty; non-state actors have influence but no sovereignty.

An intergovernmental organization — a club of states, e.g. the UN or EU.

A non-governmental organization — a private group for a cause, e.g. Amnesty International.

A multinational corporation — a big company working in many countries, e.g. Apple.

A UN climate treaty where almost 200 states promised to cut emissions to slow climate change.

States (signed it), the UN (ran the talks), NGOs (pushed targets), companies (lobbied), and Fridays for Future (protested).

Through money (companies), moral pressure (NGOs, media) and people power (movements).

Sovereignty, law-making, force (police and armies) and a seat at the UN.

A self-ruling country with its own people, territory and government — the primary actor in global politics.

A permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and recognition by other states.

The supreme right of a state to govern its own land, with no outside boss.

Being accepted as a state by other states, with treaties, embassies and a UN seat.

Only they hold sovereignty, force, binding law and UN seats; other actors work around them.

It has population, territory and a government, but limited recognition because China claims it — so statehood is political.

A state whose government cannot fully control its territory or protect its people (e.g. Somalia).

By globalization, big companies and cross-border problems like climate and migration.

Only states hold sovereignty, force and UN seats, and even global problems are handled by states cooperating.

A powerful state controls its land; a fragile or contested state cannot fully use its sovereignty.

The four features together give a state sovereignty — the top authority over its own land.

The government of a region, state or city inside a country — it runs part of the country, below the national government.

Part of the state — they are governments, just smaller ones.

The government of a city, town or district — councils and mayors, closest to daily life.

One where power is shared between the national government and regional/state governments (e.g. the US, Germany).

When a city or region acts on the world stage, such as joining a global network on climate.

A global network of large cities working together on climate change.

A campaign of US cities, states and businesses that pledged to keep the Paris climate targets after the US said it would leave (2017).

Big cities and states are larger than many countries and can act on issues like climate where national governments stall.

They have no sovereignty — they cannot sign binding treaties, and the national government can overrule them.

Subnational governments have influence but not sovereignty — they shape issues on the ground but cannot sign treaties.

Federal systems give regions real power; centralised systems keep power at the top.

An organisation whose members are states, set up by a treaty to work together on shared goals.

'Between governments' — the members are states, not individuals or charities.

An IGO's members are states (governments); an NGO's members are not — it is a charity or civil-society group.

The UN, NATO, WTO, IMF, World Bank, EU, African Union, ASEAN, WHO, UNICEF.

Pool money, people and knowledge; set rules; provide a forum; add legitimacy to shared action.

They have no army of their own and cannot force states — they depend on members and can be blocked (e.g. a veto).

A formal, binding agreement between states — often what sets up an IGO.

Shared health advice, tracked the virus and ran COVAX to send vaccines to poorer countries.

A global scheme, led by the WHO and partners, to share COVID-19 vaccines with poorer countries.

An IGO can coordinate states and pool resources, but it cannot command them — its power is borrowed from members.

Powerful states can dominate; at the UN Security Council one permanent member's veto can block a decision.

A non-state, not-for-profit group that works for a cause and is not part of any government.

The space of groups between the state, business and the family — NGOs are its organised part.

A non-state actor — it cannot make law, sign treaties or raise an army.

Amnesty International, Greenpeace, Oxfam, the Red Cross.

Through research, naming and shaming, campaigns and petitions, and delivering aid — turning facts and opinion into pressure.

Publicly exposing a government's abuses to build pressure until it changes.

A global NGO that campaigns for human rights by researching abuses and mobilising members.

Its moral authority — being trusted as honest and right, so governments cannot easily ignore it.

Expert research, moral authority, mobilising millions, and delivering aid where states cannot or will not.

No sovereignty, cannot make law, depend on donations, and can be ignored or banned.

NGOs have influence but not authority — they shape issues without being able to force anyone.

A private, profit-seeking company that operates in many countries at once — a non-state actor.

An actor owned and run for profit, not by the state — for example a company.

Economic size, jobs and investment, data and technology, and lobbying governments.

Trying to influence government decisions in a company's favour, often by spending money.

The biggest firms earn more than many countries, hold huge data, shape debate and are hard to tax or regulate.

They operate across borders and can move money and offices between states, so no single state fully controls them.

Companies have no sovereignty — they cannot make law, and states can tax, fine, regulate or ban them.

By taxing, fining or regulating it — e.g. the EU fined Google billions for breaking its rules.

They match states in economic power but not in legal authority — only states hold sovereignty.

Companies have economic influence; only states have the authority to make binding law.

For the jobs, investment and taxes big firms bring — which also gives firms bargaining power.

A large, loose network of people who act together for social or political change, mainly through protest and collective action.

Many people acting together for a shared goal — the core method of a social movement.

A movement is looser and has no single office or boss; an NGO is a formal, organised group.

Fridays for Future, Black Lives Matter, #MeToo.

From numbers and publicity — enough people making enough noise to set the agenda and shift opinion.

Forcing an issue into public and political attention — changing what everyone is talking about.

Greta Thunberg's 2018 school strike spread to millions worldwide and pushed climate up the political agenda.

The Swedish teenager whose 2018 school strike for the climate sparked the Fridays for Future movement.

Huge numbers, agenda-setting, cheap and fast online, and a voice for the powerless.

No formal power to make law, they can fragment or fade, and can be ignored or repressed.

A social movement has influence but not authority — it shapes issues but cannot make them law.

A non-state group that opposes and tries to overturn a ruling power — a government, regime or occupation.

A social movement pushes for change on an issue; a resistance movement opposes those in power and often wants to remove them.

From non-violent methods (protests, civil disobedience) to violent ones (armed struggle, insurgency).

Deliberately breaking rules seen as unjust, peacefully and accepting the consequences.

An armed rebellion against a government — the violent end of resistance.

When the army or a group seizes power by force, as in Myanmar in 2021.

After a military coup, millions protested peacefully and refused to cooperate; when crushed, parts turned to armed struggle.

Because peaceful methods can be crushed by a brutal crackdown, pushing some to fight back.

The cause (is it just?) and the methods (violent or not?) — the same group can be a 'freedom fighter' or a 'terrorist'.

A people's right to choose their own government — often a reason resistance claims to be legitimate.

The same resistance group can be seen as a 'freedom fighter' by supporters and a 'terrorist' by those in power.