Pub Date : 2023-12-30DOI: 10.1177/13540661231219087
Adam B. Lerner
This article argues that a renewed focus on how dominant international practices produce ontological insecurity can help better orient ontological security studies (OSS) to injustice in world politics, particularly as it affects structurally marginalized political actors at multiple levels. It makes this case by bringing the work of Iris Marion Young to bear on OSS, particularly her theory of justice as the elimination of domination and oppression. Drawing on Young’s “Five Faces of Oppression,” this paper argues that multiple injustices endemic to the international system should be understood as key producers of ontological insecurity in the international system, both in their direct ability to destabilize identities and in their undermining of disadvantaged actors’ ontological security-seeking practices. On international scales, these processes transcend levels of analysis, affecting individuals, social groups, and even states in differing ways. Incorporating Young’s work into OSS not only helps build a vital bridge between the oft estranged sub-disciplines of political theory and IR, but also can provide scholars a means of better theorizing how ontological insecurity is so often a product of the international system’s injustices. The paper thus concludes by proposing a normative turn within OSS, asking whether global justice should be understood as a precondition for ontological security-seeking among multiple co-existing actors.
{"title":"Global injustice and the production of ontological insecurity","authors":"Adam B. Lerner","doi":"10.1177/13540661231219087","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231219087","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that a renewed focus on how dominant international practices produce ontological insecurity can help better orient ontological security studies (OSS) to injustice in world politics, particularly as it affects structurally marginalized political actors at multiple levels. It makes this case by bringing the work of Iris Marion Young to bear on OSS, particularly her theory of justice as the elimination of domination and oppression. Drawing on Young’s “Five Faces of Oppression,” this paper argues that multiple injustices endemic to the international system should be understood as key producers of ontological insecurity in the international system, both in their direct ability to destabilize identities and in their undermining of disadvantaged actors’ ontological security-seeking practices. On international scales, these processes transcend levels of analysis, affecting individuals, social groups, and even states in differing ways. Incorporating Young’s work into OSS not only helps build a vital bridge between the oft estranged sub-disciplines of political theory and IR, but also can provide scholars a means of better theorizing how ontological insecurity is so often a product of the international system’s injustices. The paper thus concludes by proposing a normative turn within OSS, asking whether global justice should be understood as a precondition for ontological security-seeking among multiple co-existing actors.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"190 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139140528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-22DOI: 10.1177/13540661231219090
A. Lin, Saori N. Katada
China’s attempt to build geopolitical influence through economic instruments has become a critical facet of US-China competition. How can rising powers convince follower states to join alternative (geoeconomic) initiatives created and/or led by the rising powers, in the shadow of potential rebuke from the hegemon? This article theorizes how rising powers can use strategic narratives to ameliorate the follower states’ concerns of antagonizing the hegemon for aligning with alternative initiatives. We argue that rising powers can control the narrative through “two-front narration”: simultaneously telling the hegemon that they seek limited changes, while telling follower states that they do not have to worry about crossfire because the rising powers-hegemon relations are non-zero-sum. By sending the right messages to different audiences to induce motivated reasoning, rising powers can manufacture the appearance of consensus among multiple audiences to help follower states hedge, while blunting the formation of containment coalitions. We adopt a mixed-methods approach to substantiate our theory: (1) text analysis of China’s messaging about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) from 2008 to 2016; (2) case study of the rhetorical action-reactions between China, the United States, and the follower states on the relationship between the TPP and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership; and (3) parallel case study of the rhetorical action-reactions between China, the United States, and the follower states on the relationship between the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and multilateral development banks such as the World Bank. Our analysis has implications for theories of strategic narratives in international politics and debates about geoeconomic competition/hedging in Asia.
{"title":"Manufacturing consensus: China’s strategic narratives and geoeconomic competition in Asia","authors":"A. Lin, Saori N. Katada","doi":"10.1177/13540661231219090","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231219090","url":null,"abstract":"China’s attempt to build geopolitical influence through economic instruments has become a critical facet of US-China competition. How can rising powers convince follower states to join alternative (geoeconomic) initiatives created and/or led by the rising powers, in the shadow of potential rebuke from the hegemon? This article theorizes how rising powers can use strategic narratives to ameliorate the follower states’ concerns of antagonizing the hegemon for aligning with alternative initiatives. We argue that rising powers can control the narrative through “two-front narration”: simultaneously telling the hegemon that they seek limited changes, while telling follower states that they do not have to worry about crossfire because the rising powers-hegemon relations are non-zero-sum. By sending the right messages to different audiences to induce motivated reasoning, rising powers can manufacture the appearance of consensus among multiple audiences to help follower states hedge, while blunting the formation of containment coalitions. We adopt a mixed-methods approach to substantiate our theory: (1) text analysis of China’s messaging about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) from 2008 to 2016; (2) case study of the rhetorical action-reactions between China, the United States, and the follower states on the relationship between the TPP and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership; and (3) parallel case study of the rhetorical action-reactions between China, the United States, and the follower states on the relationship between the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and multilateral development banks such as the World Bank. Our analysis has implications for theories of strategic narratives in international politics and debates about geoeconomic competition/hedging in Asia.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"4 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138947374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-22DOI: 10.1177/13540661231218573
Shahar Hameiri, L. Jones
As geopolitical rivalry intensifies, Western states have moved to compete with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, the mobilisation of funds for global infrastructure remains paltry, suggesting that Western states cannot contest Chinese dominance here. Why? Through comparative political economy analysis of China and the United States, we argue that serious competition cannot be willed into being by state managers thinking geostrategically. States’ strengths and weaknesses are rooted in structural political economy dynamics. Where state managers’ plans jibe with, or express, the interests of powerful social forces and the capital and productive forces they command, a powerful impact results. This is true of China, whose BRI is principally a spatio-temporal fix for industrial overcapacity and over-accumulated capital. Conversely, where geopolitical ambitions are divorced from powerful groups’ interests and material realities, results are lacklustre. This applies to the United States, characterised by infrastructural decay, industrial hollowing-out and a dominant financial sector largely disinterested in infrastructure. Although US state managers are turning towards increased state spending on domestic infrastructure, internationally, the West’s continued neoliberal approach still relies on the already-failed approach of mobilising private capital into infrastructure investment.
{"title":"Why the West’s alternative to China’s international infrastructure financing is failing","authors":"Shahar Hameiri, L. Jones","doi":"10.1177/13540661231218573","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231218573","url":null,"abstract":"As geopolitical rivalry intensifies, Western states have moved to compete with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, the mobilisation of funds for global infrastructure remains paltry, suggesting that Western states cannot contest Chinese dominance here. Why? Through comparative political economy analysis of China and the United States, we argue that serious competition cannot be willed into being by state managers thinking geostrategically. States’ strengths and weaknesses are rooted in structural political economy dynamics. Where state managers’ plans jibe with, or express, the interests of powerful social forces and the capital and productive forces they command, a powerful impact results. This is true of China, whose BRI is principally a spatio-temporal fix for industrial overcapacity and over-accumulated capital. Conversely, where geopolitical ambitions are divorced from powerful groups’ interests and material realities, results are lacklustre. This applies to the United States, characterised by infrastructural decay, industrial hollowing-out and a dominant financial sector largely disinterested in infrastructure. Although US state managers are turning towards increased state spending on domestic infrastructure, internationally, the West’s continued neoliberal approach still relies on the already-failed approach of mobilising private capital into infrastructure investment.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"31 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138946906","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-09DOI: 10.1177/13540661231215582
Nicolas Lemay-Hébert, Ari Jerrems
This article offers a new perspective on the failed states agenda, and the reconfiguration of colonial discourse buttressing it, by theorising its afterlives. The concept of afterlives has mostly been discussed as a metaphor or in passing in the IR literature. Drawing from the post- and decolonial literature, we propose to define the concept simultaneously as echoes and aftermaths of the past. This conceptualisation of afterlives aims to contribute to the study of the persistence of colonial forms beyond notions of continuity and rupture. We develop the concept of afterlives through a discussion of the failed states agenda and its iterations. We discuss four specific iterations of the agenda: the genesis of the agenda in the decolonisation period; the consolidation of the agenda during the early 1990s; the crisis of the agenda and the rise of the resilience discussion; and finally the rise of the fragile city agenda as one of the afterlives of the failed states agenda. To illustrate our argument, we discuss two specific ‘fragments’ through which we can effectively grasp the echoes and aftermaths of coloniality: the pathologisation of fragile states and cities, operated through various twin figures (civilised/barbaric; strong/dysfunctional; resilient/vulnerable) and their practical repercussions; and the visualisation, mapping and colour-coding of fragile states and cities, exemplifying the durability and contradictions of the failed states agenda.
{"title":"The afterlives of state failure: echoes and aftermaths of colonialism","authors":"Nicolas Lemay-Hébert, Ari Jerrems","doi":"10.1177/13540661231215582","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231215582","url":null,"abstract":"This article offers a new perspective on the failed states agenda, and the reconfiguration of colonial discourse buttressing it, by theorising its afterlives. The concept of afterlives has mostly been discussed as a metaphor or in passing in the IR literature. Drawing from the post- and decolonial literature, we propose to define the concept simultaneously as echoes and aftermaths of the past. This conceptualisation of afterlives aims to contribute to the study of the persistence of colonial forms beyond notions of continuity and rupture. We develop the concept of afterlives through a discussion of the failed states agenda and its iterations. We discuss four specific iterations of the agenda: the genesis of the agenda in the decolonisation period; the consolidation of the agenda during the early 1990s; the crisis of the agenda and the rise of the resilience discussion; and finally the rise of the fragile city agenda as one of the afterlives of the failed states agenda. To illustrate our argument, we discuss two specific ‘fragments’ through which we can effectively grasp the echoes and aftermaths of coloniality: the pathologisation of fragile states and cities, operated through various twin figures (civilised/barbaric; strong/dysfunctional; resilient/vulnerable) and their practical repercussions; and the visualisation, mapping and colour-coding of fragile states and cities, exemplifying the durability and contradictions of the failed states agenda.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"7 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138585540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-24DOI: 10.1177/13540661231210931
Nicole De Silva, Anne Holthoefer
Whose preferences influence the design of international institutions? Scholarship on the legalization of international politics and creation of international legal institutions largely adopts a state-centric perspective. Existing accounts, however, fail to recognize how states often delegate authority over institutional design tasks to independent legal experts whose preferences may diverge from those of states. We develop a principal–agent (PA) framework for theorizing relations between states (collective principals) and legal actors (agents) in the design process, and for explaining how legal actors influence the design of international institutions. The legal dimensions of the PA relationship increase the likelihood of preference divergence between the collective principal and the agent, but also create conditions that enable the agent to opportunistically advance its own design preferences. We argue that the more information on states’ preferences the agent has, the more effectively it can exploit its legal expertise to strategically select and justify design choices that maximize its own preferences and the likelihood of states’ acceptance. Our analysis of two cases of delegated institutional design concerning international criminal law at the United Nations and the African Union supports our theoretical expectations. Extensive archival and interview data elucidate how agents’ variable information on states’ preferences affects their ability to effectively advance their design preferences. Our theory reveals how independent legal experts with delegated authority over design tasks influence institutional design processes and outcomes, which has practical and normative implications for the legalization of international politics.
{"title":"Hidden figures: how legal experts influence the design of international institutions","authors":"Nicole De Silva, Anne Holthoefer","doi":"10.1177/13540661231210931","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231210931","url":null,"abstract":"Whose preferences influence the design of international institutions? Scholarship on the legalization of international politics and creation of international legal institutions largely adopts a state-centric perspective. Existing accounts, however, fail to recognize how states often delegate authority over institutional design tasks to independent legal experts whose preferences may diverge from those of states. We develop a principal–agent (PA) framework for theorizing relations between states (collective principals) and legal actors (agents) in the design process, and for explaining how legal actors influence the design of international institutions. The legal dimensions of the PA relationship increase the likelihood of preference divergence between the collective principal and the agent, but also create conditions that enable the agent to opportunistically advance its own design preferences. We argue that the more information on states’ preferences the agent has, the more effectively it can exploit its legal expertise to strategically select and justify design choices that maximize its own preferences and the likelihood of states’ acceptance. Our analysis of two cases of delegated institutional design concerning international criminal law at the United Nations and the African Union supports our theoretical expectations. Extensive archival and interview data elucidate how agents’ variable information on states’ preferences affects their ability to effectively advance their design preferences. Our theory reveals how independent legal experts with delegated authority over design tasks influence institutional design processes and outcomes, which has practical and normative implications for the legalization of international politics.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139241664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Purpose: Globalization is a continuously unfolding process characterized by economic integration, cultural exchange, policy transfer across borders, and the dissemination of technological advancements in a contemporary digital age.
Methodology: This research paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the globalization process, including its limitations based on existing literature in the academic continuum. Further, given China is a technological powerhouse in the global arena, the research paper also examines the role of globalization in the spread of technology and innovation across the country.
Findings: Upon in-depth analysis of academic material, the research paper found that the globalization process arrived in waves over the years, with each wave creating economic and cultural patterns that define emerging waves including contemporary technological globalization. Technological globalization has played a crucial role in upgrading employment and wages for skilled and unskilled laborers in developing nations, disseminating technological knowledge and expertise, fostering competition between local companies and international corporations, and allowing for sustainable developments through green technological innovations from developed economies.
Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: Studies show that China plays a crucial role in the world of technology owing to technology. Furthermore, considering that technological globalization functions as a top-down structure, China has been able to skillfully use advanced technological knowledge and expertise from developed economies to boost its economy, increase its global political agenda, and steer forward environmentally friendly or rather sustainable development.
{"title":"The Role of Globalization in the Spread of Technology and Innovation across Global Markets: The Case of China","authors":"Rawda Alejla","doi":"10.47604/jir.2162","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47604/jir.2162","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Globalization is a continuously unfolding process characterized by economic integration, cultural exchange, policy transfer across borders, and the dissemination of technological advancements in a contemporary digital age.
 Methodology: This research paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the globalization process, including its limitations based on existing literature in the academic continuum. Further, given China is a technological powerhouse in the global arena, the research paper also examines the role of globalization in the spread of technology and innovation across the country.
 Findings: Upon in-depth analysis of academic material, the research paper found that the globalization process arrived in waves over the years, with each wave creating economic and cultural patterns that define emerging waves including contemporary technological globalization. Technological globalization has played a crucial role in upgrading employment and wages for skilled and unskilled laborers in developing nations, disseminating technological knowledge and expertise, fostering competition between local companies and international corporations, and allowing for sustainable developments through green technological innovations from developed economies.
 Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: Studies show that China plays a crucial role in the world of technology owing to technology. Furthermore, considering that technological globalization functions as a top-down structure, China has been able to skillfully use advanced technological knowledge and expertise from developed economies to boost its economy, increase its global political agenda, and steer forward environmentally friendly or rather sustainable development.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"41 7","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136232916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-19DOI: 10.1177/13540661231205694
Jaakko Heiskanen, Paul Beaumont
The field of International Relations (IR) is being spun around by a seemingly endless number of ‘turns’. Existing analyses of turning are few in number and predominantly concerned with the most prominent recent turns. By excavating the forgotten history of IR’s earliest turns from the 1980s and tracing the evolution of turn-talk over time, this article reveals a crucial yet overlooked internalist driver behind the phenomenon: the rise of reflexivity. Rather than emerging in the 21st century, turn-talk began at the end of the 1980s as a series of turns away from positivism and towards reflexivity. Cumulatively, this first wave of turns would denaturalise IR’s state-centric ontology while enshrining reflexivity as a canonical good among critical scholars. By the mid-1990s, however, these metatheoretical critiques of positivism had produced a substantial backlash. Charged with fostering an esoteric deconstructivism, a new generation of reflexivists set out to demonstrate the feasibility of post-positivist empirical research. As a result, IR’s turning also took on a different form from the 2000s: whereas the first wave of turns had mounted an epistemological and methodological attack against the positivist mainstream, the second wave set about bringing new ontological objects under the scrutiny of reflexivist scholars. This shift from anti-positivist to mostly intra-reflexivist turning was facilitated by the institutionalisation of critical IR as a major subfield of the discipline. It is the privileged position of reflexivity among critical IR scholars that is the condition of possibility for endless turning, accentuated by mounting pressures to demonstrate novelty in an increasingly competitive environment.
{"title":"Reflex to turn: the rise of turn-talk in International Relations","authors":"Jaakko Heiskanen, Paul Beaumont","doi":"10.1177/13540661231205694","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231205694","url":null,"abstract":"The field of International Relations (IR) is being spun around by a seemingly endless number of ‘turns’. Existing analyses of turning are few in number and predominantly concerned with the most prominent recent turns. By excavating the forgotten history of IR’s earliest turns from the 1980s and tracing the evolution of turn-talk over time, this article reveals a crucial yet overlooked internalist driver behind the phenomenon: the rise of reflexivity. Rather than emerging in the 21st century, turn-talk began at the end of the 1980s as a series of turns away from positivism and towards reflexivity. Cumulatively, this first wave of turns would denaturalise IR’s state-centric ontology while enshrining reflexivity as a canonical good among critical scholars. By the mid-1990s, however, these metatheoretical critiques of positivism had produced a substantial backlash. Charged with fostering an esoteric deconstructivism, a new generation of reflexivists set out to demonstrate the feasibility of post-positivist empirical research. As a result, IR’s turning also took on a different form from the 2000s: whereas the first wave of turns had mounted an epistemological and methodological attack against the positivist mainstream, the second wave set about bringing new ontological objects under the scrutiny of reflexivist scholars. This shift from anti-positivist to mostly intra-reflexivist turning was facilitated by the institutionalisation of critical IR as a major subfield of the discipline. It is the privileged position of reflexivity among critical IR scholars that is the condition of possibility for endless turning, accentuated by mounting pressures to demonstrate novelty in an increasingly competitive environment.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135729725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-09DOI: 10.1177/13540661231200864
Suzanne Klein Schaarsberg
Within IR, scholars are starting to consider difference on the level of ontology rather than epistemology. Other worlds are introduced into IR’s political pluriverse, however, these are often encountered in faraway places, thereby playing into the colonial narrative that ontological difference does not exist in the ‘West’. This paper introduces another real from within the ‘disenchanted North’ that is shaped by contemplative activists: people using contemplation as a form of protest. An engagement with contemplative activism challenges our commonly held assumptions about what contemplation and social change are, thereby undermining the institutions of ‘science’ and ‘religion’ underlying the universe. It argues that the project of political ontology in IR should consist of two moves: drawing in other, in particular spiritual, realities into the political imaginations of IR and challenging the ontological assumptions underpinning concepts. Consequently, it suggests that the pluriverse in IR should be a methodological rather than an ontological commitment.
{"title":"Enacting the pluriverse in the West: contemplative activism as a challenge to the disenchanted one-world world","authors":"Suzanne Klein Schaarsberg","doi":"10.1177/13540661231200864","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231200864","url":null,"abstract":"Within IR, scholars are starting to consider difference on the level of ontology rather than epistemology. Other worlds are introduced into IR’s political pluriverse, however, these are often encountered in faraway places, thereby playing into the colonial narrative that ontological difference does not exist in the ‘West’. This paper introduces another real from within the ‘disenchanted North’ that is shaped by contemplative activists: people using contemplation as a form of protest. An engagement with contemplative activism challenges our commonly held assumptions about what contemplation and social change are, thereby undermining the institutions of ‘science’ and ‘religion’ underlying the universe. It argues that the project of political ontology in IR should consist of two moves: drawing in other, in particular spiritual, realities into the political imaginations of IR and challenging the ontological assumptions underpinning concepts. Consequently, it suggests that the pluriverse in IR should be a methodological rather than an ontological commitment.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135095684","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-29DOI: 10.1177/13540661231193165
Travis Curtice, Eric Reinhardt
Scholars contend that embedding human rights conditionality in trade agreements can improve human rights. We argue that human rights interests may collide with trade, investment, and security interests. We examine these claims in the context of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), a unilateral trade preference program with robust human rights conditions, created in 2000 by the United States for up to 49 potentially eligible sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) states. US decisions to terminate AGOA beneficiary status are determined strongly by US trade, investment, and security interests. The country’s human rights record, including state-sponsored killings and other violations of physical integrity rights, has a less consistent and weaker effect.
{"title":"The politics of human rights trade sanctions: evidence from the African Growth and Opportunity Act","authors":"Travis Curtice, Eric Reinhardt","doi":"10.1177/13540661231193165","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231193165","url":null,"abstract":"Scholars contend that embedding human rights conditionality in trade agreements can improve human rights. We argue that human rights interests may collide with trade, investment, and security interests. We examine these claims in the context of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), a unilateral trade preference program with robust human rights conditions, created in 2000 by the United States for up to 49 potentially eligible sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) states. US decisions to terminate AGOA beneficiary status are determined strongly by US trade, investment, and security interests. The country’s human rights record, including state-sponsored killings and other violations of physical integrity rights, has a less consistent and weaker effect.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135243666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-27DOI: 10.1177/13540661231200370
Filippo Costa Buranelli
Scholars of International Relations (IR) and Global Historical Sociology alike have recently become more and more interested in Eurasian order(s). Yet, most recent works on Eurasian historical international relations approach the subject from a long durée perspective, mostly focusing on “big polities” from a “high altitude.” Central Asia, or “Turkestan,” and its constitutive polities such as the khanates of Bukhara, Khiva, and Khoqand and the vast array of nomadic groups surrounding them are yet terra incognita in IR, specifically with respect to the pre-Tsarist period. By relying on both primary and secondary sources, this inductive research reveals how precolonial Central Asia was an interpolity order on its own, premised on heteronomy and based on the institutions of sovereignty between the khanates and suzerainty between khanates and nomads; territoriality; Sunni Islam; trade and slavery; diplomacy; and war and aq oyluk. This paper contributes to filling this gap, and to the broader literature on Eurasian historical orders, in three respects. First, it adds granularity, detail, and specificity to current IR knowledge on Eurasia by looking at smaller polities as opposed to empires, which as noted have been the main analytical focus so far. Second, the paper adopts an emic approach to uncover local practices, institutions, and norms of precolonial Central Asia, thus adding to the recent “Global IR” debate. Third, by focusing on a case where heteronomy was the rule, this paper adds a new case to the literature on the entrenchment and durability of heteronomy in historical IR and contributes to its theory-building.
{"title":"Of nomads and khanates: heteronomy and interpolity order in 19th-century Central Asia","authors":"Filippo Costa Buranelli","doi":"10.1177/13540661231200370","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231200370","url":null,"abstract":"Scholars of International Relations (IR) and Global Historical Sociology alike have recently become more and more interested in Eurasian order(s). Yet, most recent works on Eurasian historical international relations approach the subject from a long durée perspective, mostly focusing on “big polities” from a “high altitude.” Central Asia, or “Turkestan,” and its constitutive polities such as the khanates of Bukhara, Khiva, and Khoqand and the vast array of nomadic groups surrounding them are yet terra incognita in IR, specifically with respect to the pre-Tsarist period. By relying on both primary and secondary sources, this inductive research reveals how precolonial Central Asia was an interpolity order on its own, premised on heteronomy and based on the institutions of sovereignty between the khanates and suzerainty between khanates and nomads; territoriality; Sunni Islam; trade and slavery; diplomacy; and war and aq oyluk. This paper contributes to filling this gap, and to the broader literature on Eurasian historical orders, in three respects. First, it adds granularity, detail, and specificity to current IR knowledge on Eurasia by looking at smaller polities as opposed to empires, which as noted have been the main analytical focus so far. Second, the paper adopts an emic approach to uncover local practices, institutions, and norms of precolonial Central Asia, thus adding to the recent “Global IR” debate. Third, by focusing on a case where heteronomy was the rule, this paper adds a new case to the literature on the entrenchment and durability of heteronomy in historical IR and contributes to its theory-building.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"582 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135580029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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：