The Relationship Between Interdependence and National Security: Reflections in Light of New Liberal Theory

The topic of national security holds significant importance in the writings and interests of scholars in international relations. This importance manifests itself on two levels: the academic and the operational. On the academic level, it becomes evident through the centrality of security as a research framework within the context of international relations theories. Among these theories is new liberalism, which focused on how to achieve cooperation between states and other active units in the international system, thereby achieving either national or collective security, as proposed by this school of thought. This is done by linking national security to the phenomenon of interdependence, and new liberalism has provided a range of arguments to explain the relationship between national security and interdependence.

Through this research paper, we attempt to explain the relationship between the concept of national security and interdependence concerning new liberalism through the following issue: How can the relationship between interdependence and national security be interpreted from the perspective of new liberalism?

This issue encompasses several sub-questions:

1. What are the concepts of interdependence and national security?
2. What are the reasons and indicators of the growing phenomenon of interdependence in international relations?
3. What is the relationship between national security and interdependence?

The answers to this issue and its sub-questions lead us to propose the following hypothesis:

• Achieving national security is linked to the growth of the interdependence phenomenon among all political units in the presence of strong international institutions capable of alleviating chaos.

To address the issue and verify the hypothesis, we will consider the following elements:

Axis One: Conceptual Foundation of the Study.

The discussion about the conceptual framework of this study revolves around two important variables: the variable of national security and the variable of interdependence, aiming to define them to elucidate the interconnected and interwoven relationship between them.

First: The Concept of National Security

There are numerous and varied perspectives on the concept of security; however, there is no consensus on a single definition, as it has undergone many changes over time. It has been shaped and influenced by theoretical interpretations of international relations as well as by historical events and trends. In this context, Lucia Retter and Erick Frinking, among others, discuss in “The Economy and National Security” that stability, safety, protection, and liberation from fear, threat, and conflict are fundamental themes that academic literature addresses when defining national security.

Dr. Kim R. Holmes, in his article titled “What Is National Security,” defines it as protecting the nation and its people from external attacks and dangers by maintaining armed forces and safeguarding state secrets. Trager and Kranenburg see it as that part of government policy aimed at creating favorable conditions for protecting vital values. Finally, Henry Kissinger defines it as any actions that a society undertakes to preserve its right to survival.

In summary, national security is the absence of threats directed at acquired values and the absence of fear that those values may come under attack.

Second: The Concept of Interdependence

Interdependence does not provoke much debate in its definition or conceptualization compared to other concepts in the field of international relations. Neoliberal scholars have confined it primarily to the realm of international economic relations.

• Joseph Nye defines it as a situation of mutual influence or reliance on others and their influence.
• Robert Keohane characterizes it as a decline in the importance and value of security and military relations, compared to the increasing pace and importance of multifaceted economic and social connections among countries.
• Nadia Mahmoud Mustafa describes it as a complex transnational phenomenon that involves multiple interactive patterns across various sectors among nations, producing a high degree of sensitivity among system members to changes affecting any of them, as well as a heightened vulnerability of these actors to external forces and events, thus depending on their ability to cope with or reject the burdens and costs of these external influences.

Therefore, interdependence can be defined as a relationship of mutual influence between two or more actors or as a two-way reciprocal relationship.

Axis Two: The Growth of the Interdependence Phenomenon – Causes and Indicators – From the Perspective of New Liberalism.

Before discussing the real relationship between national security and the phenomenon of interdependence among countries and other political units in international relations, it is essential to address the reciprocal phenomenon that has begun to shape a new structure in the international system. This structure seeks to benefit from various indicators and causes that have paved the way for a cooperative trajectory that shifts the relationships among states from chaos and conflict to solidarity and cooperation and interdependence.

First: Causes of the Growth of Interdependence

Neoliberals cite several reasons and factors when analyzing the causes of the growth of interdependence, including:

• The enormous and continuous increase in the volume and nature of communication and transportation among nations at all levels, resulting from the advancement of global technological revolutions.
• As a result of the increase in communication and transportation, there has been a rise in the complexity and intertwining of national interests among states, increasing their reliance on one another in many areas, such as security, economics, politics, and culture.
• With greater interconnectedness among nations and growing threats, no country today, regardless of its power, can distance itself from the events and currents of international politics, as these may affect its geostrategic national interests, national security, and international standing.

Second: Indicators of the Growing Phenomenon of Interdependence

Proponents of new liberalism present a set of characteristics or traits that indicate the actual existence of the interdependence phenomenon and its role in international relations. Theoretically, they rely on a set of standards through which they assess the presence or absence of the phenomenon:

• The volume of transactions that take place among key actors in the international system.
• The degree of sensitivity among international actors.
• The actors’ susceptibility to external influences.
• The availability of institutional frameworks for interaction among international units.

Additionally, there are various practical indicators that demonstrate that the world is indeed experiencing a significant state of interdependence, through which the previous criteria can be inferred:

• Connections among societies through various informal links among governmental elites, in addition to formal external ties and informal relations.
• The international agenda comprises many issues that do not follow a specific hierarchy of importance. In other words, military security issues no longer hold the priority they once did, but are now rivaled by other issues such as economics, environment, human rights, etc.
• Military power has become less meaningful in resolving disputes over economic issues among countries characterized by interdependence.

Axis Three: The Relationship Between Interdependence and National Security from the Perspective of New Liberal Theory.

Initially, it can be said that liberalism usually tends to focus on issues related to international economic relations by emphasizing non-state actors, multinational corporations, international organizations, and all international institutions to guide foreign behavior according to cooperation rather than conflict. Based on this, proponents of this approach believe that the primary trait of international politics is cooperation rather than conflict.

The failures of the realist perspective, as well as the shortcomings of liberal theory in institutionalizing international relations, led liberals to review and refine their fundamental assumptions in response to ongoing developments. Beginning in the 1980s, neoliberalism emerged, giving rise to a new wave of theorists who based their propositions on a set of assumptions, including:

• Interdependence connects countries with one another and leads them to cooperate.
• Countries prefer trade over war.
• Peace presupposes and necessitates interdependence.
• The neoliberal view of national security focuses on the role of interdependence and international institutions that can mitigate conflicts and wars among states.

From this standpoint, the concept of interdependence is among the most crucial assumptions of new liberalism that originated as a challenge and an alternative to the realist perspective advocating self-help. Thus, interdependence becomes one of the fundamental tenets of this theoretical trajectory. Key figures in this domain include not only Friedman but also Joseph Nye and Robert Keohane, who highlighted the effects of interdependence on the reality of international politics through the following points:

• International politics has become a stage for numerous interactions and activities occurring among parties and non-state actors.
• High mutual growth among states reduces the likelihood of military power being employed in light of the increasing economic power.
• Security, according to the neoliberal perspective, is a variable specific to states within the context of national security, as well as a variable that relates multiple countries instead of just one, referred to as collective security.
• States can achieve their national security through policies of international cooperation and interdependence that they establish with all political units, both state and non-state. The COVID-19 pandemic serves as a prime example showcasing the role of international organizations in reinforcing the principle of solidarity among countries through institutions like the Red Cross and Red Crescent and the World Health Organization to unify international efforts in finding treatments and vaccines against the pandemic.

Based solely on the reality of the international environment, neoliberals have linked interdependence with national security (collective security) considering that the former establishes conditions for cooperation among states, thereby reducing wars and achieving security. They argue that the principle of interdependence among states and non-state actors creates mutual interests that may become costly if abandoned (the more state and non-state actors lean towards cooperation and interdependence, the more they are able to achieve their national security).

Therefore, from a modern perspective, the issue of national security fulfills the critical premise – the approach of interdependence – because for new liberals, security is less simplified and more complex, and it does not merely encompass the military dimension, as emphasized by Barry Buzan. Security now encompasses various domains and multiple dimensions, such as health security, environmental security, and intellectual security, among others. Consequently, the principle of interdependence and policies of economic integration and alliances can ensure national security. An example of this is Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO, as these two countries perceived that their interests and achieving national security necessitated joining this alliance.

In general, new liberals believe that mutual interdependence can contribute to reducing tensions between countries, as their intertwined interests make the decision for war challenging for both sides. First, the nature of interests resulting from interdependence has grown to a size far exceeding the gains of war; second, those who have benefited from this interdependence will make the decision for war difficult and costly. Thus, neoliberals view that achieving collective security lies in states moving towards interdependence and economic integration by creating economic institutions (institutional liberalism) that bolstered the security orientation, regardless of the rise of concepts of common security and their crystallization into collective security systems reinforced by interdependence ideology.

However, this approach, which attempts to promote supranational thought, has faced significant decline recently due to the rise of nationalism, modern ideologies, and some countries’ tendencies toward isolation and restriction of interdependence in light of the resurgence of the nation-state’s role in its Westphalian concept, characterized by the sanctity of borders, national sovereignty, and self-interest at the expense of other states, which was evident during the COVID-19 pandemic (the policy of closure) and the Russia-Ukraine crisis.

Conclusion:

It can be said that new liberals have linked the concept of interdependence to many implications, such as the idea of achieving national security and cooperation. They also attempted to justify the hypothesis of the inevitable connection between interdependence and national security through the existence of strong international institutions capable of alleviating the dilemma of anarchy. In this context, there is an important debate between neoliberals and neorealists regarding the idea of the relationship between interdependence and national security, especially since neorealism adopts an important assumption of self-help. This prompts us to question the possibility of explaining the relationship between the variable of interdependence and the variable of national security from the perspective of the new realist school. Neoliberals assert that the climate of international relations leans towards a mutually dependent situation rather than towards chaos and war. There is another aspect of the international system that is widening and on its way to imposing some form of customary and voluntarily accepted international law by all states.