Group items tagged

"International law is currently undergoing a major transformation that has provoked a 'legal turn' in the field of International Relations. At the heart of this transformation are the juridification of international politics and subsequently the judicialisation of international law. This contribution argues that scholars of critical International Political Economy have not yet paid enough attention to this process. What is needed is a theory of international law that is able to grasp the societal implications of this transformation. In a first step some accounts drawing on Antonio Gramsci and Evgeny Pashukanis are presented, with a view to making their theory fruitful for analysing international law. Against the background of an empirical study that compares the global regulation of trade in goods with the trade in services, delivered notably through natural persons, some major shortcomings of these accounts are outlined. The last part of the contribution presents some ideas on how to further develop a critical theory of international (trade) law that introduces a communicative dimension into the legal turn with a view to distinguishing between different extra-economic dynamics."

International law is currently undergoing a major transformation that has provoked a 'legal turn' in the field of International Relations. At the heart of this transformation are the juridification of international politics and subsequently the judicialisation of international law. This contribution argues that scholars of critical International Political Economy have not yet paid enough attention to this process. What is needed is a theory of international law that is able to grasp the societal implications of this transformation. In a first step some accounts drawing on Antonio Gramsci and Evgeny Pashukanis are presented, with a view to making their theory fruitful for analysing international law. Against the background of an empirical study that compares the global regulation of trade in goods with the trade in services, delivered notably through natural persons, some major shortcomings of these accounts are outlined. The last part of the contribution presents some ideas on how to further develop a critical theory of international (trade) law that introduces a communicative dimension into the legal turn with a view to distinguishing between different extra-economic dynamics

When political actors and international relations scholars invoke 'the international community', the term is commonly framed very loosely. It is used either as a reference to the norms of international politics or, according to its composition, as a coalition of concerned actors. This article, by contrast, argues that it is the interplay of image and practice of the term's invocation that shapes its multi-faceted character. 'The international community' can be used by many different groups, state and non-state alike, to locate their political goals in the context of a wider array of values. Usually, these norms are state related and can be used to simulate political relevance. Conversely, actors defying widely accepted values can be excluded and policy against them legitimized. Addressing domestic as well as international audiences, the claim to be acting as, or on behalf of, 'the international community' is mostly virtual but has definite political consequences.

"Legitimation of power through institutions is not new in world politics. Yet, the dynamics of the conferment or withdrawal of legitimacy through the work of international administrations in the context of contemporary statebuilding policies remains - to date - insufficiently explored. This article aims to narrow such a gap by analysing attainment of legitimacy and its deficit through the work of the United Nations Mission in Kosovo following the ending of hostilities in 1999. Emphasising the political complexities involved in domestic-international exchanges, the analysis shows that the international administration and the local elite have pursued alternative views with conflicting implications for the local society. The resulting disaccord related to priorities and expectations of the international administration and those of domestic actors has hindered the local population's acceptance of the international mission and benefited claims for self-governance. The dynamics of domestic-international interactions in the context of Kosovo resonate with those in Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and East Timor. Given that domestic circumstances have had a key impact on the evolving relationship between the international and local actors, paying more attention to the domestic setting is likely to save more time, energy, and resources in achieving sought goals."

A few years ago, it was a common complaint that the international dimension of democratization and, in particular, the external promotion of democracy were largely neglected by scholars of comparative politics and international relations. By now, academic research has begun to catch up with the growth of foreign and development policies explicitly aiming at the international promotion and protection of democratic regimes. Yet, what is still a largely unexplored desideratum is the challenge to theoretically grasp 'democracy promotion' as an aim and strategy of democratic foreign policies - that is, to embed the empirical research on democracy promotion in theoretical perspectives on international relations. This article sets out to contribute to filling this gap by developing a classification of competing theoretical approaches. First, research on the democratic peace - the one major research program concerned with democratic foreign policy - is used to derive potential motives behind the promotion of democracy. Then, on this basis, existing theories of international relations are modified in order to locate democracy promotion within the foreign policy of democratic states. In conclusion, the article presents four sketches of potential theoretical approaches to the external promotion of democracy.

Recognition of other cultural mappings and sensitivities can facilitate meaningful dialogue in International Relations. On this assurance, the naturalised history of the discipline becomes more susceptible to rival accounts that materialise in other locales. Limits to dialogue, however, are internal to International Relations, a product of particular histories and settlements. This article probes some of the limits imposed by the spectres of nihilism on International Relations as theory and practice. These limits originate principally from the repudiation of Transcendence and the collapse of Western metaphysics as well as the imposition of a framework of 'post-politics' drawn from reading obituaries of the death of the liberal modern Western subject worldwide.

Barry Buzan & Lene Hansen (2009) note that the first glimmer of concern with women and security within international relations and peace studies was a site of tension: in the 1970s and into the 1980s, women were not on the agenda of international relations at all. Peace theorists embraced the concept of structural violence but also excluded women from their discussions. There are now new inclusion/exclusion tensions within feminist international relations and its security wing. In this article I address two tensions: (1) concern to maintain the stance that security is a peace issue as some venture systematically into feminist war studies, and (2) a tendency to issue harsh judgements of feminists whose views challenge the accommodation of cultural difference. I briefly consider examples of these two tensions and suggest ways to work with and beyond the structure of international relations to 'evolve' (feminist) security studies further.

The issue of how to achieve change-in short of how to act-in a complex international system of 192 member states, without authoritative structures, or even a clear hierarchy of power, has been neglected in the literature of the academic subject of international relations. The focus has been predominantly on structures at the expense less of individual actors-much is written about the foreign policies of the major powers-than of the problem of agency itself. In terms of effecting significant change, how much is it reasonable to expect, and of whom? This lecture, which was given to mark the establishment of the new Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge, surveys the parameters of the problems of action, concluding that while states are still the most important site of agency at the international level the critical dilemma is now that of accepting and managing complexity and diversity. In particular the West must accept that its ability to provide leadership, unquestioned over the last two centuries, can no longer be assumed.

This essay starts by exploring how history can contribute to the discipline of international relations (IR). It then moves beyond this question to explore a broader question, beyond IR and history, with which this symposium is concerned: how can we enhance interdisciplinary analysis in international studies? With regard to the first question, this essay advances several themes. First, while history can serve IR in several ways, it is especially salient to the study of change in IR. Second, the study of history can help us connect the dots across time in ways that can complement IR. Stringing detailed cases together or examining the broader sweep of a longer time period may help us discern causal connections that would have been buried in more streamlined and short-term analyses. Third, history can aid in theory-building, modeling, and testing in the study of IR. Quantitative approaches can also benefit from in-depth historical studies. In assessing the value of history to IR, however, it is critical to ask what type of historians and IR scholars we are considering and to be aware of the differences among them. Fourth, while it is useful to draw on history for IR, history also has its limits and may be misused. At the core, this essay examines how history can contribute to IR, but that analysis raises a broader question: how can we integrate notions and insights from various disciplines in international studies, including history and IR? This essay advances one schema for doing so, which it calls "integrated approaches." It demonstrates one type of integrated approach for the study of foreign policy behavior. The approach systematically draws on multiple disciplines to explain behaviors such as decisions to make treaties, go to war, or ally with other countries.

"China's rise as a great power has promoted a great deal of soul searching among Chinese scholars, and concern about whether China's contribution to the world of International Relations scholarship lags behind its rise as an important shaper of the international system. There is a common understanding that China cannot escape addressing the role of theoretical discourse in directing Chinese foreign policy and framing its understanding of China's role in the world. A perception of China as suffering from a dependent relationship to International Relations (IR) theory, and a desire to transform the role of Chinese scholars from consumers of theory to its producers inspires a debate over the formation of a distinctive 'Chinese school'."

International Relations scholars and policy-makers are increasingly paying greater attention to a new category of fragile and failed states across Asia, Africa, the Balkans, the Caucasus, Latin America and the Middle East. While effective policy responses are necessary to strengthen these politically fractured, economically collapsing and socially divided states, the category itself appears to be more politically and ideologically charged and less critically understood in the context of international relations. There is a general tendency to avoid examining how political and economic policies and military actions by the West contributed to the degeneration of these states. This article seeks to re-examine the causes of state fragility and failure, and critically reviews the current US strategies to rebuild the failed states of Afghanistan and Iraq. It argues that the US-led statebuilding strategies in both countries are based on a wrong diagnosis of the political and social problems, and the solutions offered are also ill-conceived. The article also contends that the Western liberal vision of the state, premised on the Weberian notion, commands less relevance to the fragile and failed states in the non-Western world.

Systems of governance are legitimised as an almost indispensable response to global co-ordination over matters of environmental degradation. Considering sustainable development as the key label for 'common-sense' political approaches to environmental degradation and a key informant for international environmental policy-making activity, this article seeks to problematise such a widespread discourse as (re)productive of (hetero)sexist power relations. As such, this article, informed by Foucault's conceptions of governmentality and biopower, contends that the global thrust towards sustainable development projects works to construct identities and discipline power relations with regard to gender and sexuality. Specifically, I argue that the disciplinary narratives and apparatuses of international sustainable development initiatives work to construct gendered identities and naturalise heterosexual relations. To demonstrate this, this article focuses on the discourses surrounding one of the most important international documents directed at informing national environmental policy, Agenda 21.

This study examines the impact of international administrations on the development and functioning of political parties in post-conflict settings, using Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo as case studies. These cases show how, next to the establishment of a functioning institutional framework, the development and maturity of local political elites are crucial factors of post-conflict democratization, as a genuine handover of power has yet to take place in both countries. Notwithstanding the international political relevance attached to the establishment of democratic governance in post-conflict areas, the local dimension of (enforced) democratization, especially the role and relevance of political parties, has been largely overlooked in academic research. This analysis therefore explores the institutional and cultural dimensions of 'external' democratization and international administrations' influence on political parties and politics in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo.

Is Chinese "soft power" really transforming the world? Joshua Kurlantzick and Yale University Press provide us with a neat, definitive answer: yes. In 2007, Kurlantzick published a book entitled Charm Offensive: How China's Soft Power is Transformingthe World. Looking closely at the period from approximately 1999 to 2006 (virtually all his sources were published during those years), Kurlantzick makes the following case. The prestige of the United States and its relations with China were not going well. There was the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001, followed by an unpopular war in Iraq launched by an increasingly unpopular U.S. president (George Bush). The glory days of the Clinton presidency were over. With respect to Sino-American bilateral relations, there was the U.S. missile strike on the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999 and then the nasty spy plane incident off the coast of Hainan in 2001. At approximately the same time, China was becoming an extremely important world economic force. For the first time in its modern history, China was a major actor in international relations and had plenty of money to spend on upgrading its global prestige and influence. "Since most economists," Kurlantzick asserted, "project that China's economy will continue to expand between 7 and 10 percent per year, Beijing can continue its rapid growth in trade" (p. 94).

This paper examines countries' free-riding incentives in international environmental agreements (IEAs) when, first, the treaty is non-enforceable, and, second, countries do not have complete information about other countries' non-compliance cost. We analyze a signaling model whereby the country leading the negotiations of the international agreement can reveal its own non-compliance costs through the commitment level it signs in the IEA. Our results show that countries' probability of joining the IEA is increasing in the free-riding benefits they can obtain from other countries' compliance, and decreasing in the cost of not complying with the initial terms of the agreement. This paper shows that, when free-riding incentives are strong enough, there is no equilibrium in which all countries join the IEA. Despite not joining the IEA, however, countries invest in clean technologies. Finally, we relate our results with some common observations in international negotiations.

This article aims to show the theoretical added value of focussing on discourse to study identity in international relations (IR). I argue that the discourse approach offers a more theoretically parsimonious and empirically grounded way of studying identity than approaches developed in the wake of both constructivism and the broader 'psychological turn'. My starting point is a critique of the discipline's understanding of the 'self' uncritically borrowed from psychology. Jacques Lacan's 'speaking subject' offers instead a non-essentialist basis for theorizing about identity that has been largely overlooked. To tailor these insights to concerns specific to the discipline I then flesh out the distinction between subject-positions and subjectivities. This crucial distinction is what enables the discourse approach to travel the different levels of analyses, from the individual to the state, in a way that steers clear of the field's fallacy of composition, which has been perpetuated by the assumption that what applies to individuals applies to states as well. Discourse thus offers a way of studying state identities without presuming that the state has a self. I illustrate this empirically with regards to the international politics of whaling.

This article seeks to extend feminist critiques of Habermasian discourse ethics in International Relations by engaging with the feminist ethics of care. Using the work of Andrew Linklater as a starting point, it argues that neither the existing critiques nor the responses have adequately addressed the key features of care ethics. The article critiques the idea of ethics as dialogue among 'human beings as equals' through an elaboration of several features of the ethics of care: firstly, the importance in care ethics of 'dependency' and 'vulnerability' not as conditions to be overcome, but rather as ways of being for normal human subjects; secondly, the focus on the responsibilities for listening attentively to the voices of others rather than on rights of individuals to be included in dialogue; thirdly, the need for patience and commitment in the recognition that responsibilities to others are fulfilled over the long, rather than the short, term; and, finally, the idea of care ethics as a substantive, democratic ethic of responsibility. These arguments emerge out of the basic ideas of care ethics - that relations and responsibilities of care are central to human life, and that care is a public value that must be negotiated at a variety of levels, from the household to the international community.

A question of interest to scholars of International Politics concerns the manner in which weaker states attempt to influence stronger ones. This article offers a case study of one recent exercise in coalition-building among southern powers as a vehicle for change in international relations. It analyzes the global interests, strategies and values of India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) and the impact of the IBSA Dialogue Forum on the global order. Five major points are outlined. First, common ideas and values shape the global discourse of the emerging coalition. Second, soft balancing based on a value-driven middle power discourse is a suitable concept to explain IBSA's strategy in global institutions. Third, institutional foreign policy instruments such as agenda-setting and coalition-building are pivotal elements of IBSA's soft balancing approach. Fourth, the trilateral coalition suffers from considerable divergence of interest in global governance issues and limited potential gains of its sectoral cooperation, particularly in trade, due to a lack of complementarities of the participating economies. Finally, despite these obstacles the IBSA Forum has impacted the global order in recent years as a powerful driver for change. India, Brazil and South Africa have contributed to an incremental global power shift in their favour. The southern coalition also induced a change in the character of multilateralism and, in particular, its procedural values.

Scholars of International Relations (IR) increasingly realise that their discipline, including its theories and methods, often neglects voices and experiences outside of the West. But how do we address this problem and move the discipline forward? While some question whether 'Western' and 'non-Western' (or 'post-Western') are useful labels, there are also other perspectives, including those who believe in the adequacy of existing theories and approaches, those who argue for particular national 'schools' of IR, and those who dismiss recent efforts to broaden IR theory as 'mimicry' in terms of their epistemological underpinnings. After reviewing these debates, this article identifies some avenues for further research with a view to bringing out the global heritage of IR. These include, among other things, paying greater attention to the genealogy of international systems, the diversity of regionalisms and regional worlds, the integration of area studies with IR, people-centric approaches to IR, security and development, and the agency role of non-Western ideas and actors in building global order. I also argue for broadening the epistemology of IR theory with the help of non-Western philosophies such as Buddhism. While the study of IR remains dominated by Western perspectives and contributions, it is possible to build different and alternative theories which originate from non-Western contexts and experiences.

Robert W. Cox's contribution to International Relations theory places the discipline in a transformational framework. Building on Gramsci's ideas and a variety of other sources eclectically, his theory goes beyond the neorealist statecentric framework and brings out the connections between material conditions, ideas and institutions in what he terms the formation of 'world orders'. How people organize themselves in the sphere of production not only determines their own life but also that of their states and the world order. In saying that change can come from any one of the spheres (material conditions, ideas and institutions), he denies and goes beyond the base-superstructure thesis of Marxism.