The corruption of international society? General and complete disarmament from the perspective of the practitioners

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS European Journal of International Relations Pub Date : 2022-06-10 DOI:10.1177/13540661221102930
Laust Schouenborg
{"title":"The corruption of international society? General and complete disarmament from the perspective of the practitioners","authors":"Laust Schouenborg","doi":"10.1177/13540661221102930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article investigates whether practitioners argued that general and complete disarmament (GCD) would corrupt international society during the two major debates of this issue in the 20th century, namely in 1927–1928 and 1959. The purpose and value of this analysis is to learn more about the workings of international society. Following Bull and other English School scholars, GCD probably represents the most radical challenge to the traditional conception of international society and its institutions. The only challenge of similar magnitude would appear to be the creation of a universal state or world government, fundamentally removing anarchy from the ‘anarchical society’. The article thus investigates whether those concerns about corruption, raised by scholars, resonate with the expressed public opinion of practitioners – diplomats and statesmen – in the actual deliberation of GCD in international fora: the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, 1927–1928, and the United Nations, 1959. The main finding is that the corruption argument does appear in these public deliberations, and in intriguing and complex ways. The article thus offers a novel analysis of how practitioners publicly deal with a supposedly radical challenge to international society.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"28 1","pages":"616 - 639"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221102930","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article investigates whether practitioners argued that general and complete disarmament (GCD) would corrupt international society during the two major debates of this issue in the 20th century, namely in 1927–1928 and 1959. The purpose and value of this analysis is to learn more about the workings of international society. Following Bull and other English School scholars, GCD probably represents the most radical challenge to the traditional conception of international society and its institutions. The only challenge of similar magnitude would appear to be the creation of a universal state or world government, fundamentally removing anarchy from the ‘anarchical society’. The article thus investigates whether those concerns about corruption, raised by scholars, resonate with the expressed public opinion of practitioners – diplomats and statesmen – in the actual deliberation of GCD in international fora: the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, 1927–1928, and the United Nations, 1959. The main finding is that the corruption argument does appear in these public deliberations, and in intriguing and complex ways. The article thus offers a novel analysis of how practitioners publicly deal with a supposedly radical challenge to international society.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国际社会的腐败?从业人员视角下的全面彻底裁军
本文考察了在20世纪的两次主要辩论中,即1927-1928年和1959年,实践者是否认为全面彻底裁军(GCD)会腐蚀国际社会。这种分析的目的和价值在于更多地了解国际社会的运作。继布尔和其他英国学派学者之后,GCD可能代表了对国际社会及其制度的传统观念的最激进的挑战。唯一的挑战似乎是建立一个普遍的国家或世界政府,从根本上消除“无政府社会”中的无政府状态。因此,本文调查了学者们提出的对腐败的担忧是否与国际论坛(1927-1928年裁军谈判会议筹备委员会和1959年联合国)实际审议GCD时的从业人员(外交官和政治家)所表达的公众意见产生共鸣。主要的发现是,腐败的争论确实出现在这些公开讨论中,并且以有趣而复杂的方式出现。因此,这篇文章提供了一个新颖的分析,实践者如何公开处理对国际社会的激进挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.80%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The European Journal of International Relations publishes peer-reviewed scholarly contributions across the full breadth of the field of International Relations, from cutting edge theoretical debates to topics of contemporary and historical interest to scholars and practitioners in the IR community. The journal eschews adherence to any particular school or approach, nor is it either predisposed or restricted to any particular methodology. Theoretically aware empirical analysis and conceptual innovation forms the core of the journal’s dissemination of International Relations scholarship throughout the global academic community. In keeping with its European roots, this includes a commitment to underlying philosophical and normative issues relevant to the field, as well as interaction with related disciplines in the social sciences and humanities. This theoretical and methodological openness aims to produce a European journal with global impact, fostering broad awareness and innovation in a dynamic discipline. Adherence to this broad mandate has underpinned the journal’s emergence as a major and independent worldwide voice across the sub-fields of International Relations scholarship. The Editors embrace and are committed to further developing this inheritance. Above all the journal aims to achieve a representative balance across the diversity of the field and to promote deeper understanding of the rapidly-changing world around us. This includes an active and on-going commitment to facilitating dialogue with the study of global politics in the social sciences and beyond, among others international history, international law, international and development economics, and political/economic geography. The EJIR warmly embraces genuinely interdisciplinary scholarship that actively engages with the broad debates taking place across the contemporary field of international relations.
期刊最新文献
Global injustice and the production of ontological insecurity Why the West’s alternative to China’s international infrastructure financing is failing Manufacturing consensus: China’s strategic narratives and geoeconomic competition in Asia The afterlives of state failure: echoes and aftermaths of colonialism Hidden figures: how legal experts influence the design of international institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1