Taming the Sovereigns: Institutional Change in International Politics (review)

Continuity and transformation in international history is both a central concern of international-relations theory and a subject that is often marginalized in the field. Indeed, international-relations scholars frequently engage work in disciplines that have interests and orientations distinct from those of political science. Although this tendency makes international change a wonderfully multidisciplinary exercise, it also contributes to conceptual fragmentation.

One of Holsti's major contributions is his attempt to bring conceptual order to the study of international change. Holsti argues, after a lucid overview, that international institutions are the proper locus for the analysis of international continuity and transformation. He understands institutions in the sociological sense: as the "patterned (typical) actions and interactions of states, the norms, rules, and principles that guide (or fail to guide) them, and the major ideas and beliefs of a historical era" (18). These institutions, he argues, can be divided into the "foundational" ones that act and interact within international politics and the "procedural" ones that guide their conduct. Examples of the latter include "diplomacy, trade, colonialism, and war" (27).

The basic punchline of Holsti's study is that the state system has undergone a variety of changes since its inception in early modern Europe, but that claims to radical transformation in the fundamental nature of the state system are premature. Sovereigns have "tamed themselves" through the construction of norms, rules, and formal institutions that point "in the direction of increased peaceful coexistance between distinct political communities" (318).

In fact, Holsti's analysis is most trenchant when he tackles the general argument that the state is withering away or becoming obsolescent as a result of globalization from above, and identity-based fragmentation from below (62–69). His conceptual framework reminds us that change operates at different levels, in different domains, and at difference speeds. We should not conflate changes in some domains, such as the conduct of international trade, with a broader shift away from the centrality of states.

The conceptual and historical breadth of Holsti's study contributes to its limitations. Many scholars may find themselves perplexed by some of Holsti's assertions, such as that the "Franks . . . are better known for their depredations than for political continuity and the creation of international institutions" or that nomads "do not create states" (29). The historical accounts often feel "potted," and many of the interpretations on which Holsti relies are deeply controversial. Although such problems are probably inevitable given the scope of the work, they confirm that comparative-historical analysis usually requires more systematic study of the causes and consequence of change than is possible in macrohistorical accounts written by non-specialists. Nevertheless, Holsti's book is an important addition to both the growing body of literature on the nature of international change and to the ongoing debate about the fate of the sovereign state.