Pub Date : 2021-11-23DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0309
Turkey is a country that has been the outcome of domestic and global political, economic, societal challenges over two thousand years of massive transformations, from the nomadic Asian steppe to the Mediterranean agrarian world, to Islam, and to modernity, as well as from the cosmopolitan Ottoman ruling class to the modern Turkish nationalist elite and, recently, globalization and identity politics. Turkey’s history has been marked by confusion about the Ottoman Empire, which has been viewed as too European/Roman to be considered distinctly Asian and too Eastern to be considered European. Its successful centuries-long rule in Southeastern Europe has been a matter of curiosity, as has its turbulent modernization, which started pretty soon after the French Revolution. Its heir, the Turkish Republic, has been a typical modern state in accordance with the European political geography. Yet another recurrent theme has perhaps been the curious paradox of strong state and low state capacity. No matter whether foreign or domestic policy, economy or politics, history or present-day, (self-)perceptions and studies have oscillated between a strong Turkish state and its lower capacity on such issues as institutions, identity cleavages, class, gender, regional inequalities, protracted poverty and deprivation, and so on. Turkey has often been thought of as a latecomer to modern development, and this tension of missing and catching universal development has often been a recurrent theme since the Ottoman modernization in the 1830s or the proud new Republic’s substantial reforms in the 1920s, and at a level ranging from everyday life conversations to the highest level of official discourse. The political elite have often failed in state-society relations, but the country has often been subject to discussions on democratic consolidation; the economy has often been unstable, but it is still a member of the G20. In sum, the Republic of Turkey has been but one manifestation of world history: a modern state heir to a universal agrarian empire that disappeared like its fellows, a swift authoritarian modernization in the interwar years whose heritage still occupy minds, a Cold War security state that has developed in America-centered global capitalism, a post–Cold War state of neoliberal globalization trying to find its way in the turbulences of world politics and economy, with a failed desire of leadership in its neighborhood. Accordingly, the more than eighty sources cited and annotated here guide the readers through various manifestations of Turkey within historical, political, cultural, societal, economic, and foreign policy (with focus on the regional and the European dimensions) contexts. All in all, Turkish society has always been able to cope with all the above-mentioned challenges and manifestations, but it has been often very difficult for those earning and enjoying life with their honest labor.
{"title":"Turkey","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0309","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0309","url":null,"abstract":"Turkey is a country that has been the outcome of domestic and global political, economic, societal challenges over two thousand years of massive transformations, from the nomadic Asian steppe to the Mediterranean agrarian world, to Islam, and to modernity, as well as from the cosmopolitan Ottoman ruling class to the modern Turkish nationalist elite and, recently, globalization and identity politics. Turkey’s history has been marked by confusion about the Ottoman Empire, which has been viewed as too European/Roman to be considered distinctly Asian and too Eastern to be considered European. Its successful centuries-long rule in Southeastern Europe has been a matter of curiosity, as has its turbulent modernization, which started pretty soon after the French Revolution. Its heir, the Turkish Republic, has been a typical modern state in accordance with the European political geography. Yet another recurrent theme has perhaps been the curious paradox of strong state and low state capacity. No matter whether foreign or domestic policy, economy or politics, history or present-day, (self-)perceptions and studies have oscillated between a strong Turkish state and its lower capacity on such issues as institutions, identity cleavages, class, gender, regional inequalities, protracted poverty and deprivation, and so on. Turkey has often been thought of as a latecomer to modern development, and this tension of missing and catching universal development has often been a recurrent theme since the Ottoman modernization in the 1830s or the proud new Republic’s substantial reforms in the 1920s, and at a level ranging from everyday life conversations to the highest level of official discourse. The political elite have often failed in state-society relations, but the country has often been subject to discussions on democratic consolidation; the economy has often been unstable, but it is still a member of the G20. In sum, the Republic of Turkey has been but one manifestation of world history: a modern state heir to a universal agrarian empire that disappeared like its fellows, a swift authoritarian modernization in the interwar years whose heritage still occupy minds, a Cold War security state that has developed in America-centered global capitalism, a post–Cold War state of neoliberal globalization trying to find its way in the turbulences of world politics and economy, with a failed desire of leadership in its neighborhood. Accordingly, the more than eighty sources cited and annotated here guide the readers through various manifestations of Turkey within historical, political, cultural, societal, economic, and foreign policy (with focus on the regional and the European dimensions) contexts. All in all, Turkish society has always been able to cope with all the above-mentioned challenges and manifestations, but it has been often very difficult for those earning and enjoying life with their honest labor.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85786205","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-29DOI: 10.1177/00471178211052822
Meirav Mishali-Ram
This article examines the nexus between international crises and civil wars. Based on the premise that not all simultaneous civil and international conflicts are related, the study aims to explore the circumstances in which civil wars affect violent escalation in international crises. The study identifies ‘composite’ crises – where the civil war is the core issue of the international dispute – as a unique subset of international crises. These crises are distinguished from ‘unrelated-civil war’ situations, in which the issues in the internal and international conflicts are separate. Using data from the ICB, COW, and UCDP/PRIO datasets, the article tests a dual-conflict argument, positing that interconnected issues and interactions between actors in composite situations inhibit moderate crisis management and aggravate interstate behavior. The findings show that while civil war in composite situations has a negative impact on crisis escalation, unrelated-civil war has an inverse impact on interstate relations in crisis.
{"title":"International crisis in the midst of civil war","authors":"Meirav Mishali-Ram","doi":"10.1177/00471178211052822","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211052822","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the nexus between international crises and civil wars. Based on the premise that not all simultaneous civil and international conflicts are related, the study aims to explore the circumstances in which civil wars affect violent escalation in international crises. The study identifies ‘composite’ crises – where the civil war is the core issue of the international dispute – as a unique subset of international crises. These crises are distinguished from ‘unrelated-civil war’ situations, in which the issues in the internal and international conflicts are separate. Using data from the ICB, COW, and UCDP/PRIO datasets, the article tests a dual-conflict argument, positing that interconnected issues and interactions between actors in composite situations inhibit moderate crisis management and aggravate interstate behavior. The findings show that while civil war in composite situations has a negative impact on crisis escalation, unrelated-civil war has an inverse impact on interstate relations in crisis.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"23 1","pages":"307 - 326"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82140884","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-28DOI: 10.1177/00471178211052813
Cahir O’Doherty
The question of how wars end is of continued importance, especially in the context of the ongoing War on Terror. This question has traditionally been approached within International Relations through rational choice theories, logical modelling and game theory. Such approaches have become increasingly ill-suited to capturing the complexity and ambiguity of contemporary warfare and the War on Terror in particular. These battlefield ambiguities are often at odds with political and public desires to see decisive victory in wars. This article builds on recent critical work within War Termination Studies in order to re-conceptualise the end of war as assemblages. By paying greater attention to the affects inculcated by political rhetoric surrounding war and utilising the concepts of affect and emergence, this article presents a novel approach to the study of contemporary war termination. Utilising popular culture, increasingly seen as a crucial site of global politics, the case study analysed here advances the argument that sacrifice emerges from cinema and presidential rhetoric as a trope that allows leaders to claim victory in war despite indecisive conditions of the ground. Through affective cinematic encounters, conceptualised here through the end of wars assemblages, audiences can become more accepting of such political claims.
{"title":"Assemblages of conflict termination: popular culture, global politics and the end of wars","authors":"Cahir O’Doherty","doi":"10.1177/00471178211052813","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211052813","url":null,"abstract":"The question of how wars end is of continued importance, especially in the context of the ongoing War on Terror. This question has traditionally been approached within International Relations through rational choice theories, logical modelling and game theory. Such approaches have become increasingly ill-suited to capturing the complexity and ambiguity of contemporary warfare and the War on Terror in particular. These battlefield ambiguities are often at odds with political and public desires to see decisive victory in wars. This article builds on recent critical work within War Termination Studies in order to re-conceptualise the end of war as assemblages. By paying greater attention to the affects inculcated by political rhetoric surrounding war and utilising the concepts of affect and emergence, this article presents a novel approach to the study of contemporary war termination. Utilising popular culture, increasingly seen as a crucial site of global politics, the case study analysed here advances the argument that sacrifice emerges from cinema and presidential rhetoric as a trope that allows leaders to claim victory in war despite indecisive conditions of the ground. Through affective cinematic encounters, conceptualised here through the end of wars assemblages, audiences can become more accepting of such political claims.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86570999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-27DOI: 10.1177/00471178211052870
R. Villa, S. Sundaram
Although the recent advancements in critical constructivist IR on political rhetoric has greatly improved our understanding of linguistic mechanisms of political action, we need a sharp understanding of how rhetoric explains foreign policy change. Here we conceptualize a link between rhetoric and foreign policy change by foregrounding distinct dynamics at the regional and domestic institutional environments. Analytically, at the regional level, we suggest examining whether norms of foreign policy engagement are explicitly coded in treaties and agreements or implicit in conventions and practices of actors. And at the domestic level, we suggest examining whether a particular foreign policy issue area is concurrent or contested among interlocutors. In this constellation, we clarify how four different rhetorical strategies underwrites foreign policy change – persuasion, mediation, explication and reconstruction – how it operates, and the processes through which it unfolds in relation to multiple audiences. Our principal argument is that grand foreign policy change requires continuous rhetorical deployments with varieties of politics to preserve and stabilize the boundaries in the ongoing fluid relations of states. We illustrate our argument with an analysis of Brazil’s South-South grand strategy under the Lula administration and contrast it against the rhetoric of subsequent administrations. Our study has implications for advancing critical foreign policy analysis on foreign policy change and generally for exploring new ways of studying foreign policies of nonwestern postcolonial states in international relations.
{"title":"Foreign policy change as rhetorical politics: domestic-regional constellation of Global South states","authors":"R. Villa, S. Sundaram","doi":"10.1177/00471178211052870","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211052870","url":null,"abstract":"Although the recent advancements in critical constructivist IR on political rhetoric has greatly improved our understanding of linguistic mechanisms of political action, we need a sharp understanding of how rhetoric explains foreign policy change. Here we conceptualize a link between rhetoric and foreign policy change by foregrounding distinct dynamics at the regional and domestic institutional environments. Analytically, at the regional level, we suggest examining whether norms of foreign policy engagement are explicitly coded in treaties and agreements or implicit in conventions and practices of actors. And at the domestic level, we suggest examining whether a particular foreign policy issue area is concurrent or contested among interlocutors. In this constellation, we clarify how four different rhetorical strategies underwrites foreign policy change – persuasion, mediation, explication and reconstruction – how it operates, and the processes through which it unfolds in relation to multiple audiences. Our principal argument is that grand foreign policy change requires continuous rhetorical deployments with varieties of politics to preserve and stabilize the boundaries in the ongoing fluid relations of states. We illustrate our argument with an analysis of Brazil’s South-South grand strategy under the Lula administration and contrast it against the rhetoric of subsequent administrations. Our study has implications for advancing critical foreign policy analysis on foreign policy change and generally for exploring new ways of studying foreign policies of nonwestern postcolonial states in international relations.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"45 1","pages":"454 - 479"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87497979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-27DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0306
The foreign policy analysis (FPA) subfield is situated at the intersection of international relations (IR) and foreign policy behaviors of states. It is characterized by the primacy of the agent-specific ontology and the various cognitive decision-making theoretical models that explain the causal link between actors and foreign policymaking. FPA privileges realist conceptions of the world and downplays the role of normative considerations in foreign policymaking. With the end of the Cold War and the increased frequency of humanitarian interventions foreign policy analyses devoted more attention to normative considerations and the role of ethics or morality in foreign policy, while also retaining the focus on agent-specific explanations. In particular, the just war theory, while primarily a theory/tradition about moral reasoning, became the most prominent theoretical model in the debates about humanitarian interventions. However, the just war theory scholars mostly debate the theory’s reasoning with reference to the specific humanitarian actions instead of using it as a heuristic device for mapping out the moral compass of the actual decision makers. In other words, the FPA subfield has not experienced any paradigmatic transformations, similar to those in IR, and it is not ready to deal with the possibility of morality as a separate analytical category. The British foreign policy literature differs from the American along those lines, especially concerning the foreign policy of the European Union (EU). This literature looks at morality as the initial motivating factor behind EU foreign policy, whereas the American scholarship debates the morality of foreign policy outcomes based on the criteria set out by the just war theory. The FPA subfield in the United States could benefit from thinking about morality from a critical perspective. Incorporating critical approaches in FPA will elevate the role of morality in foreign policymaking.
{"title":"Morality in Foreign Policy","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0306","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0306","url":null,"abstract":"The foreign policy analysis (FPA) subfield is situated at the intersection of international relations (IR) and foreign policy behaviors of states. It is characterized by the primacy of the agent-specific ontology and the various cognitive decision-making theoretical models that explain the causal link between actors and foreign policymaking. FPA privileges realist conceptions of the world and downplays the role of normative considerations in foreign policymaking. With the end of the Cold War and the increased frequency of humanitarian interventions foreign policy analyses devoted more attention to normative considerations and the role of ethics or morality in foreign policy, while also retaining the focus on agent-specific explanations. In particular, the just war theory, while primarily a theory/tradition about moral reasoning, became the most prominent theoretical model in the debates about humanitarian interventions. However, the just war theory scholars mostly debate the theory’s reasoning with reference to the specific humanitarian actions instead of using it as a heuristic device for mapping out the moral compass of the actual decision makers. In other words, the FPA subfield has not experienced any paradigmatic transformations, similar to those in IR, and it is not ready to deal with the possibility of morality as a separate analytical category. The British foreign policy literature differs from the American along those lines, especially concerning the foreign policy of the European Union (EU). This literature looks at morality as the initial motivating factor behind EU foreign policy, whereas the American scholarship debates the morality of foreign policy outcomes based on the criteria set out by the just war theory. The FPA subfield in the United States could benefit from thinking about morality from a critical perspective. Incorporating critical approaches in FPA will elevate the role of morality in foreign policymaking.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77220175","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-16DOI: 10.1177/00471178211052819
Sian Troath
Studying trust at the international level is one of the greatest challenges for trust studies. In this article I seek to expand on work which has sought to study trust between states in a way which avoids anthropomorphising the state, and retains the salience of interpersonal trust. To do this, I consider trust between states as existing in a web of relationships, from relationships between government figures, to military personnel, to members of society. In this article I demonstrate the value of incorporating actors beyond leaders in the most minimal sense: through including boundary spanners, those whose relationships and interactions span across boundaries, whether those boundaries be state borders or segments of government and society. Furthermore, I seek to begin a process of categorising the types of roles that boundary spanners can play in the development of trust between states. To illustrate their impact, I deploy a multidimensional approach to trust which is used to assess the relationship between leaders, and the impact of intermediary figures on both trust between the leaders, and in the relationships developed between the intermediary and their respective leader. One case study is used to exemplify the utility of this approach: the relationship between Harold Macmillan and John F. Kennedy and their respective official ambassadors David Ormsby-Gore and David Bruce.
{"title":"Trusted intermediaries: Macmillan, Kennedy and their ambassadors","authors":"Sian Troath","doi":"10.1177/00471178211052819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211052819","url":null,"abstract":"Studying trust at the international level is one of the greatest challenges for trust studies. In this article I seek to expand on work which has sought to study trust between states in a way which avoids anthropomorphising the state, and retains the salience of interpersonal trust. To do this, I consider trust between states as existing in a web of relationships, from relationships between government figures, to military personnel, to members of society. In this article I demonstrate the value of incorporating actors beyond leaders in the most minimal sense: through including boundary spanners, those whose relationships and interactions span across boundaries, whether those boundaries be state borders or segments of government and society. Furthermore, I seek to begin a process of categorising the types of roles that boundary spanners can play in the development of trust between states. To illustrate their impact, I deploy a multidimensional approach to trust which is used to assess the relationship between leaders, and the impact of intermediary figures on both trust between the leaders, and in the relationships developed between the intermediary and their respective leader. One case study is used to exemplify the utility of this approach: the relationship between Harold Macmillan and John F. Kennedy and their respective official ambassadors David Ormsby-Gore and David Bruce.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"18 1","pages":"262 - 284"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77104327","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-11DOI: 10.1177/00471178211052880
Corina Lacatus
Transnational regional networks of regulatory bodies play a prominent role in complex systems of human rights governance. Despite their growing importance, we still have much to learn about the roles regional networks play as regulatory stewards in the field of human rights. I draw on the literature about regulatory stewardship to analyse a recently formalised regulatory network operating in Europe – the European Network of National Human Rights Institutions. The analysis proposes a model of global governance for human rights that includes networks of national human rights institutions as intermediaries. Moreover, it draws on some of the main concepts of network analysis to assesses the European network’s development into a ‘network administrative organisation’ and applies the model of regulatory stewardship to analyse the institutional network’s use of hierarchical and managerial stewardship to: support its member institutions; stimulate intra-network communication and learning; gain access to international networks; and to shape the regional human rights agenda.
{"title":"Regulatory networks and regional human rights governance: A study of the European Network of National Human Rights Institutions","authors":"Corina Lacatus","doi":"10.1177/00471178211052880","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211052880","url":null,"abstract":"Transnational regional networks of regulatory bodies play a prominent role in complex systems of human rights governance. Despite their growing importance, we still have much to learn about the roles regional networks play as regulatory stewards in the field of human rights. I draw on the literature about regulatory stewardship to analyse a recently formalised regulatory network operating in Europe – the European Network of National Human Rights Institutions. The analysis proposes a model of global governance for human rights that includes networks of national human rights institutions as intermediaries. Moreover, it draws on some of the main concepts of network analysis to assesses the European network’s development into a ‘network administrative organisation’ and applies the model of regulatory stewardship to analyse the institutional network’s use of hierarchical and managerial stewardship to: support its member institutions; stimulate intra-network communication and learning; gain access to international networks; and to shape the regional human rights agenda.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"27 1","pages":"192 - 213"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72811390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-14DOI: 10.1177/00471178211045619
J. Grzybowski
Ontological security studies (OSS) in International Relations (IR) emphasize the role of identity, anxiety, and a sense of self in world politics. Yet suggesting that states act in certain ways because of ‘who they are’ also assumes that they are in fact states. In this article, I problematize the presupposition of state subjects in the context of separatist conflicts in which claims to statehood compete and overlap. Where unrecognized de facto states are pitted against their unyielding parent states, the two threaten each other’s very state personhood, thereby presenting a more radical challenge to their existence than traditional ‘physical’ and ‘ontological’ security threats. Separatist conflicts thus reveal a widely overlooked dimension of fundamental ontological security, provided by the constitution and recognition of states as such. Moreover, because of the exclusiveness of state subjects in the modern international order, any third parties attempting to resolve such conflicts inevitably face a meta-security dilemma whereby reassuring one side by confirming its claim to statehood simultaneously renders the other side radically insecure. Thus, rather than regarding particular state subjects as merely the starting point of quests for ontological security in international relations, they should also be understood as already their result.
{"title":"Separatists, state subjectivity, and fundamental ontological (in)security in international relations","authors":"J. Grzybowski","doi":"10.1177/00471178211045619","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211045619","url":null,"abstract":"Ontological security studies (OSS) in International Relations (IR) emphasize the role of identity, anxiety, and a sense of self in world politics. Yet suggesting that states act in certain ways because of ‘who they are’ also assumes that they are in fact states. In this article, I problematize the presupposition of state subjects in the context of separatist conflicts in which claims to statehood compete and overlap. Where unrecognized de facto states are pitted against their unyielding parent states, the two threaten each other’s very state personhood, thereby presenting a more radical challenge to their existence than traditional ‘physical’ and ‘ontological’ security threats. Separatist conflicts thus reveal a widely overlooked dimension of fundamental ontological security, provided by the constitution and recognition of states as such. Moreover, because of the exclusiveness of state subjects in the modern international order, any third parties attempting to resolve such conflicts inevitably face a meta-security dilemma whereby reassuring one side by confirming its claim to statehood simultaneously renders the other side radically insecure. Thus, rather than regarding particular state subjects as merely the starting point of quests for ontological security in international relations, they should also be understood as already their result.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"1 1","pages":"504 - 522"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89614381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.1177/00471178211045620
A. Dougall
This article explores the relationship between the 19th century ‘global transformation’ and the contemporary intensification of communication media through the lens of Greater Britain, a late-Victorian ordering imaginary centred on the integration of Britain and its white settler colonies. Contrary to existing conceptions of globe-spanning media as either components of ‘interaction capacity’ or boundary conditions that set broad outer limits for political thought, I advance an understanding of media as socio-technical and political structures in their own right and explore how they surface meanings and representations upon which imaginaries such as Greater Britain depended. The argument thereby contributes to International Relations (IR) debates on global modernity, communication media and the dynamics of historical change.
{"title":"Shrinking planet, expanding imaginary: the imperial press system and the idea of Greater Britain","authors":"A. Dougall","doi":"10.1177/00471178211045620","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211045620","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the relationship between the 19th century ‘global transformation’ and the contemporary intensification of communication media through the lens of Greater Britain, a late-Victorian ordering imaginary centred on the integration of Britain and its white settler colonies. Contrary to existing conceptions of globe-spanning media as either components of ‘interaction capacity’ or boundary conditions that set broad outer limits for political thought, I advance an understanding of media as socio-technical and political structures in their own right and explore how they surface meanings and representations upon which imaginaries such as Greater Britain depended. The argument thereby contributes to International Relations (IR) debates on global modernity, communication media and the dynamics of historical change.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"6 1","pages":"48 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77484883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-09DOI: 10.1177/00471178211045623
Anke Schwarzkopf
This paper aims to account for the EU’s role in multilateral negotiations at the UNGA by looking at the negotiations on the enhanced observer status. During the negotiation process, the EU experienced significant opposition and had to accept an intermediate setback in form of a postponement of the vote. Despite this, the EU’s enhanced observer status was adopted by the UNGA in May 2011 as resolution 65/276. This research contributes to the understanding of the EU as an actor in multilateral negotiations and the interaction between state and non-state actors. I argue that the EU is in the process of establishing itself as an active and recognized actor at the UN and determining its role as a highly integrated regional organization and non-state entity in the state-centric environment of the UNGA. I analyse the negotiation process and the final agreement through the lenses of a bargaining approach and as an alternative, mutual recognition as global justice.
{"title":"The EU as a global negotiator? The advancement of the EU’s role in multilateral negotiations at the UN General Assembly","authors":"Anke Schwarzkopf","doi":"10.1177/00471178211045623","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178211045623","url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to account for the EU’s role in multilateral negotiations at the UNGA by looking at the negotiations on the enhanced observer status. During the negotiation process, the EU experienced significant opposition and had to accept an intermediate setback in form of a postponement of the vote. Despite this, the EU’s enhanced observer status was adopted by the UNGA in May 2011 as resolution 65/276. This research contributes to the understanding of the EU as an actor in multilateral negotiations and the interaction between state and non-state actors. I argue that the EU is in the process of establishing itself as an active and recognized actor at the UN and determining its role as a highly integrated regional organization and non-state entity in the state-centric environment of the UNGA. I analyse the negotiation process and the final agreement through the lenses of a bargaining approach and as an alternative, mutual recognition as global justice.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"13 1","pages":"574 - 592"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90168704","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：