Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1177/13540661221143214
Benjamin E. Goldsmith, Y. Horiuchi
Scholars and practitioners often argue that the United States’ identity as a democracy contributes to the effectiveness and endurance of US military alliances. One way to test this claim is to ask: what would happen if citizens of allied countries came to perceive US democracy as severely flawed or diminished? In the context of now well-documented Russian interference in recent US elections, we examine whether Russia’s election interference and its perceived impact on American democracy damage foreign public opinion about the United States. The results of our survey experiment fielded in Japan suggest that information about successful Russian election interference—that is, interference that had an impact on the election outcome—reduces foreign citizens’ faith in the United States as an ally. This pattern most clearly manifests in reduced belief in the US capacity to defend Japan. Our study sheds light on the connections between the image of the United States, both as a trustworthy and effective state, and the foreign public’s attitudes toward US alliances, with theoretical and practical implications.
{"title":"Does Russian election interference damage support for US alliances? The case of Japan","authors":"Benjamin E. Goldsmith, Y. Horiuchi","doi":"10.1177/13540661221143214","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221143214","url":null,"abstract":"Scholars and practitioners often argue that the United States’ identity as a democracy contributes to the effectiveness and endurance of US military alliances. One way to test this claim is to ask: what would happen if citizens of allied countries came to perceive US democracy as severely flawed or diminished? In the context of now well-documented Russian interference in recent US elections, we examine whether Russia’s election interference and its perceived impact on American democracy damage foreign public opinion about the United States. The results of our survey experiment fielded in Japan suggest that information about successful Russian election interference—that is, interference that had an impact on the election outcome—reduces foreign citizens’ faith in the United States as an ally. This pattern most clearly manifests in reduced belief in the US capacity to defend Japan. Our study sheds light on the connections between the image of the United States, both as a trustworthy and effective state, and the foreign public’s attitudes toward US alliances, with theoretical and practical implications.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"427 - 448"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49525554","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 : 2022-12-28DOI: 10.1177/13540661221140099
M. Stewart
What explains the emergence of leftist rebel groups? I provide one explanation for their origins in colonized and recently decolonized countries during the Cold War. In this context, I argue that imperial assimilatory education programs terminating in the metropole facilitated the rise of a would-be rebel leadership cadre committed to leftist ideas and connected to leftist activists, and this cadre ultimately made the formation of a leftist rebel group more likely. Relying on archival and primary materials, I focus on variation in educational experiences of rebel leaders in Eritrea’s Independence War to qualitatively evaluate different explanations for the formation of groups with different ideologies. I probe generalizability quantitatively with a global sample of civil wars, as well as qualitatively with an overview of cases colonized by Portugal using archival data from three countries.
{"title":"Foundations of the Vanguard: the origins of leftist rebel groups","authors":"M. Stewart","doi":"10.1177/13540661221140099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221140099","url":null,"abstract":"What explains the emergence of leftist rebel groups? I provide one explanation for their origins in colonized and recently decolonized countries during the Cold War. In this context, I argue that imperial assimilatory education programs terminating in the metropole facilitated the rise of a would-be rebel leadership cadre committed to leftist ideas and connected to leftist activists, and this cadre ultimately made the formation of a leftist rebel group more likely. Relying on archival and primary materials, I focus on variation in educational experiences of rebel leaders in Eritrea’s Independence War to qualitatively evaluate different explanations for the formation of groups with different ideologies. I probe generalizability quantitatively with a global sample of civil wars, as well as qualitatively with an overview of cases colonized by Portugal using archival data from three countries.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"398 - 426"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44051238","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 : 2022-12-17DOI: 10.1177/13540661221142179
P. Beaumont, Elana Wilson Rowe
The Anthropocene has given rise to growing efforts to govern the world’s ecosystems. There is a hitch, however, ecosystems do not respect sovereign borders; hundreds traverse more three states and thus require complex international cooperation. This article critically examines the political and social consequences of the growing but understudied trend towards transboundary ecosystem cooperation. Matchmaking the new hierarchy scholarship in International Relations (IR) and political geography, the article theorises how ecosystem discourse embodies a latent spatially exclusive logic that can bind together and bound from outside unusual bedfellows in otherwise politically awkward spaces. We contend that such ‘ecosystemic politics’ can generate spatialised ‘broad hierarchies’ that cut across both Westphalian renderings of space and the latent post-colonial and/or material inequalities that have hitherto been the focus of most of the new hierarchies scholarship. We illustrate our argument by conducting a multilevel longitudinal analysis of how Caspian Sea environmental cooperation has produced a broad hierarchy demarking and sharpening the boundaries of the region, become symbolic of Caspian in-group competence and neighbourliness, and used as a rationale for future Caspian-shaped cooperation. We reason that if ecosystemic politics can generate new renderings of space amid an otherwise heavily contested space as the Caspian, further research is warranted to explore systemic hierarchical consequences elsewhere.
{"title":"Space, nature and hierarchy: the ecosystemic politics of the Caspian Sea","authors":"P. Beaumont, Elana Wilson Rowe","doi":"10.1177/13540661221142179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221142179","url":null,"abstract":"The Anthropocene has given rise to growing efforts to govern the world’s ecosystems. There is a hitch, however, ecosystems do not respect sovereign borders; hundreds traverse more three states and thus require complex international cooperation. This article critically examines the political and social consequences of the growing but understudied trend towards transboundary ecosystem cooperation. Matchmaking the new hierarchy scholarship in International Relations (IR) and political geography, the article theorises how ecosystem discourse embodies a latent spatially exclusive logic that can bind together and bound from outside unusual bedfellows in otherwise politically awkward spaces. We contend that such ‘ecosystemic politics’ can generate spatialised ‘broad hierarchies’ that cut across both Westphalian renderings of space and the latent post-colonial and/or material inequalities that have hitherto been the focus of most of the new hierarchies scholarship. We illustrate our argument by conducting a multilevel longitudinal analysis of how Caspian Sea environmental cooperation has produced a broad hierarchy demarking and sharpening the boundaries of the region, become symbolic of Caspian in-group competence and neighbourliness, and used as a rationale for future Caspian-shaped cooperation. We reason that if ecosystemic politics can generate new renderings of space amid an otherwise heavily contested space as the Caspian, further research is warranted to explore systemic hierarchical consequences elsewhere.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"449 - 475"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46651912","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 : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1177/13540661221139062
L. Khalili
In what ways does humanitarianism uphold racial capitalism? The article draws on and expands Cedric Robinson’s arguments about the relationship between humanitarianism and racial capitalism in his Black Marxism. It does so by focusing on the Mission to Seafarers in the countries of the Persian/Arabian Gulf. The Mission has worked alongside state institutions and businesses, both before and after independence from Britain, to facilitate maritime trade through these Arabian ports. In the context of seafarer exploitation, these institutions – the extractive, the governing and the caring – need to ensure worker productivity to facilitate racial accumulation of capital. I argue that the Mission acts as part of the structure of political economic order to produce a racially striated, capitalist politics of care to individuated and atomised seafarers, acting to conciliate conflicts between seafarers and shipowners, maintain seafarer productivity and diminish the possibility of collective mobilisation.
{"title":"Humanitarianism and racial capitalism in the age of global shipping","authors":"L. Khalili","doi":"10.1177/13540661221139062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221139062","url":null,"abstract":"In what ways does humanitarianism uphold racial capitalism? The article draws on and expands Cedric Robinson’s arguments about the relationship between humanitarianism and racial capitalism in his Black Marxism. It does so by focusing on the Mission to Seafarers in the countries of the Persian/Arabian Gulf. The Mission has worked alongside state institutions and businesses, both before and after independence from Britain, to facilitate maritime trade through these Arabian ports. In the context of seafarer exploitation, these institutions – the extractive, the governing and the caring – need to ensure worker productivity to facilitate racial accumulation of capital. I argue that the Mission acts as part of the structure of political economic order to produce a racially striated, capitalist politics of care to individuated and atomised seafarers, acting to conciliate conflicts between seafarers and shipowners, maintain seafarer productivity and diminish the possibility of collective mobilisation.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"374 - 397"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44371322","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 : 2022-11-22DOI: 10.1177/13540661221136772
Leonie Holthaus
This article conceives of climate activists as emotion entrepreneurs to explain the emergence of particular emotional responses to climate change. Among these emotional responses is eco-grief or grief felt because of experienced or anticipated ecological losses. I elaborate on the concept of the emotion entrepreneur and theorize the emergence of eco-grief on the basis of a practice theoretical and Bourdieusian approach. I suggest that activists possessing cultural capital are well positioned to introduce new feelings and identify three mechanisms that contribute to explanations of the emergence and growing importance of eco-grief. Objectivation is about the most often reflexive practice of giving names to emotions to turn them into ontological entities. Cultivation is about the creation of social spaces for the experience and regulation of eco-grief among activists. Diffusion is about emotional contagion, the creation of emotional vocabularies, and the spread of activist feeling rules. Research on emotion entrepreneurs moves beyond conceptions of feelings as causes of activism and suggests there is a need for further research on emotional dynamics in heterogenous transnational advocacy coalitions, influences of language on emotions, and feelings rules in late-modern Western societies.
{"title":"Feelings of (eco-) grief and sorrow: climate activists as emotion entrepreneurs","authors":"Leonie Holthaus","doi":"10.1177/13540661221136772","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221136772","url":null,"abstract":"This article conceives of climate activists as emotion entrepreneurs to explain the emergence of particular emotional responses to climate change. Among these emotional responses is eco-grief or grief felt because of experienced or anticipated ecological losses. I elaborate on the concept of the emotion entrepreneur and theorize the emergence of eco-grief on the basis of a practice theoretical and Bourdieusian approach. I suggest that activists possessing cultural capital are well positioned to introduce new feelings and identify three mechanisms that contribute to explanations of the emergence and growing importance of eco-grief. Objectivation is about the most often reflexive practice of giving names to emotions to turn them into ontological entities. Cultivation is about the creation of social spaces for the experience and regulation of eco-grief among activists. Diffusion is about emotional contagion, the creation of emotional vocabularies, and the spread of activist feeling rules. Research on emotion entrepreneurs moves beyond conceptions of feelings as causes of activism and suggests there is a need for further research on emotional dynamics in heterogenous transnational advocacy coalitions, influences of language on emotions, and feelings rules in late-modern Western societies.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"352 - 373"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44349266","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 : 2022-11-15DOI: 10.1177/13540661221137037
James W. Davis
Behavioral IR is enjoying newfound popularity. Nonetheless, attempts to integrate behavioral research into the larger project of IR theory have proven controversial. Many scholars treat behavioral findings as a trove of plausible ad hoc modifications to rational choice models, thereby lending credence to arguments that behavioral IR is merely residual, empirical, and hence not theoretical. Others limit their research to cataloging outcomes consistent with the basic tenets of behavioral models. Although this expands the empirical base, it is insufficient for theoretical progress. In this article, I explore various answers to the question of when rational choice or behavioral assumptions should guide efforts to build IR theory. I argue that no single answer trumps all others. Examining the various conditions under which actors reason highlights the importance of macrofoundations. Macrofoundations condition the effects of microprocesses and help identify relevant scope conditions for both rational choice and behavioral models of decision-making. Examining the various purposes of IR theory also provides answers to the question of when rational or behavioral assumptions are likely to be most useful. Although many behavioral scholars premise the relevance of their findings on claims of empirical realism, I argue that under certain conditions, deductive theorizing on the basis of as-if behavioral assumptions can lead to powerful theories that improve our understanding of IR and may help decision-makers promote desired ends.
{"title":"Better than a bet: good reasons for behavioral and rational choice assumptions in IR theory","authors":"James W. Davis","doi":"10.1177/13540661221137037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221137037","url":null,"abstract":"Behavioral IR is enjoying newfound popularity. Nonetheless, attempts to integrate behavioral research into the larger project of IR theory have proven controversial. Many scholars treat behavioral findings as a trove of plausible ad hoc modifications to rational choice models, thereby lending credence to arguments that behavioral IR is merely residual, empirical, and hence not theoretical. Others limit their research to cataloging outcomes consistent with the basic tenets of behavioral models. Although this expands the empirical base, it is insufficient for theoretical progress. In this article, I explore various answers to the question of when rational choice or behavioral assumptions should guide efforts to build IR theory. I argue that no single answer trumps all others. Examining the various conditions under which actors reason highlights the importance of macrofoundations. Macrofoundations condition the effects of microprocesses and help identify relevant scope conditions for both rational choice and behavioral models of decision-making. Examining the various purposes of IR theory also provides answers to the question of when rational or behavioral assumptions are likely to be most useful. Although many behavioral scholars premise the relevance of their findings on claims of empirical realism, I argue that under certain conditions, deductive theorizing on the basis of as-if behavioral assumptions can lead to powerful theories that improve our understanding of IR and may help decision-makers promote desired ends.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"476 - 500"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42347440","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 : 2022-11-15DOI: 10.1177/13540661221136764
Neil C. Renic
In this article, I trace and critique the discourse of “The Superweapon Peace”—the long-standing and enduring idea that weapons of radical destructiveness, both nuclear and non-nuclear, can force an end to war by rendering it too destructive to contemplate. The Superweapon Peace, I argue, is constituted by three elements. The first is an assumption of war as a controllable and resolvable problem. Within this formulation, superweapons function as disincentivizers, “solving” war by raising its destructive cost to an unendurable level. For all its intuitive appeal, this logic is flawed, grounded in a certitude of control that fails to comport with empirical reality. The second element of The Superweapon Peace is utopian ambition. Its proponents hold that through the threat of mass violence, war can be overcome in a fundamental sense. This, I argue, gives license to a ruthless consequentialism at odds with conventional morality, which restricts the use or threatened use of violence against those not liable to such an end. The third and final element of The Superweapon Peace is silver-bullet thinking, which frames the superweapon as the most effective, and likely only, method by which to eliminate or significantly mitigate large-scale armed conflict. This mode of thinking has overly narrowed the scope of possibility regarding alternative remedies to war. The Superweapon Peace, I ultimately conclude, is a false promise, giving license to modes of thinking and action that imperil rather than facilitate peace.
{"title":"Superweapons and the myth of technological peace","authors":"Neil C. Renic","doi":"10.1177/13540661221136764","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221136764","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I trace and critique the discourse of “The Superweapon Peace”—the long-standing and enduring idea that weapons of radical destructiveness, both nuclear and non-nuclear, can force an end to war by rendering it too destructive to contemplate. The Superweapon Peace, I argue, is constituted by three elements. The first is an assumption of war as a controllable and resolvable problem. Within this formulation, superweapons function as disincentivizers, “solving” war by raising its destructive cost to an unendurable level. For all its intuitive appeal, this logic is flawed, grounded in a certitude of control that fails to comport with empirical reality. The second element of The Superweapon Peace is utopian ambition. Its proponents hold that through the threat of mass violence, war can be overcome in a fundamental sense. This, I argue, gives license to a ruthless consequentialism at odds with conventional morality, which restricts the use or threatened use of violence against those not liable to such an end. The third and final element of The Superweapon Peace is silver-bullet thinking, which frames the superweapon as the most effective, and likely only, method by which to eliminate or significantly mitigate large-scale armed conflict. This mode of thinking has overly narrowed the scope of possibility regarding alternative remedies to war. The Superweapon Peace, I ultimately conclude, is a false promise, giving license to modes of thinking and action that imperil rather than facilitate peace.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"129 - 152"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48090525","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 : 2022-11-08DOI: 10.1177/13540661221135049
Stefano Palestini, Erica Martinelli
The Inter-American Democratic Charter (IADC) is the most comprehensive multilateral framework for dealing with democratic breakdowns and backslidings in the Western Hemisphere. In such cases, the Organisation of American States (OAS) is supposed to defend democracy by suspending states, imposing sanctions or taking other multilateral measures. Oftentimes, however, the OAS has looked the other way. The question, then, is what makes the difference. In this comparative case study, we use cross-cases comparisons and process-tracing to identify the actors and causal mechanisms that determine when and whether the IADC is actually enforced. We explain inconsistent enforcement by analysing interactions among three sets of actors – the governments of powerful member states, OAS secretaries general and civil society organisations – during coups, executive takeovers and electoral frauds in OAS member states between 2001 and 2020. Our analysis reveals that cooperation between an activist secretary general and civil society actors was neither sufficient nor necessary for IADC enforcement. By contrast, US support for enforcement was a necessary but insufficient condition for the OAS to act. To get it to do so, the United States required the support of two leading regional powers: Mexico and Brazil. These findings suggest that the ‘right to democracy’ enshrined in the IADC hinges upon the volatile preferences of the executives of the OAS’s three most powerful member states. The resulting lack of institutional autonomy leads to inconsistent enforcement of the IADC, jeopardising the credibility of the region’s formally declared right to democracy.
{"title":"Enforcing peoples’ right to democracy: transnational activism and regional powers in contemporary Inter-American relations","authors":"Stefano Palestini, Erica Martinelli","doi":"10.1177/13540661221135049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221135049","url":null,"abstract":"The Inter-American Democratic Charter (IADC) is the most comprehensive multilateral framework for dealing with democratic breakdowns and backslidings in the Western Hemisphere. In such cases, the Organisation of American States (OAS) is supposed to defend democracy by suspending states, imposing sanctions or taking other multilateral measures. Oftentimes, however, the OAS has looked the other way. The question, then, is what makes the difference. In this comparative case study, we use cross-cases comparisons and process-tracing to identify the actors and causal mechanisms that determine when and whether the IADC is actually enforced. We explain inconsistent enforcement by analysing interactions among three sets of actors – the governments of powerful member states, OAS secretaries general and civil society organisations – during coups, executive takeovers and electoral frauds in OAS member states between 2001 and 2020. Our analysis reveals that cooperation between an activist secretary general and civil society actors was neither sufficient nor necessary for IADC enforcement. By contrast, US support for enforcement was a necessary but insufficient condition for the OAS to act. To get it to do so, the United States required the support of two leading regional powers: Mexico and Brazil. These findings suggest that the ‘right to democracy’ enshrined in the IADC hinges upon the volatile preferences of the executives of the OAS’s three most powerful member states. The resulting lack of institutional autonomy leads to inconsistent enforcement of the IADC, jeopardising the credibility of the region’s formally declared right to democracy.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"780 - 805"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49282837","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 : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.1177/13540661221133206
Naosuke Mukoyama
The conventional accounts of the history of the sovereign state system assume that territorial sovereignty originated in Europe and spread to the rest of the world through colonial expansion. This implies that territory, which is a core feature of the modern state, and more specifically, linear borders, had not existed outside Europe before other societies encountered the West. Focusing on early modern Japan, this article challenges that assumption by showing that there was a similar territorial order outside Europe that developed in parallel with its European counterpart. Through an investigation of boundary disputes, boundary markers, and map-making during the Edo period (1603–1868), it demonstrates that linear borders were not foreign to early modern Japan. Domains in Edo Japan were already well into the process of building a territorial order with demarcated borders and mutual exclusion. This article contributes to International Relations scholarship by addressing the “Westphalian myth” from a geographical rather than temporal perspective and shifting the focus of the study of non-Western international systems from differences to similarities. It also suggests a potential revision of scholarly understandings of discontinuity before and after the Meiji Restoration in Japan.
{"title":"The Eastern cousins of European sovereign states? The development of linear borders in early modern Japan","authors":"Naosuke Mukoyama","doi":"10.1177/13540661221133206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221133206","url":null,"abstract":"The conventional accounts of the history of the sovereign state system assume that territorial sovereignty originated in Europe and spread to the rest of the world through colonial expansion. This implies that territory, which is a core feature of the modern state, and more specifically, linear borders, had not existed outside Europe before other societies encountered the West. Focusing on early modern Japan, this article challenges that assumption by showing that there was a similar territorial order outside Europe that developed in parallel with its European counterpart. Through an investigation of boundary disputes, boundary markers, and map-making during the Edo period (1603–1868), it demonstrates that linear borders were not foreign to early modern Japan. Domains in Edo Japan were already well into the process of building a territorial order with demarcated borders and mutual exclusion. This article contributes to International Relations scholarship by addressing the “Westphalian myth” from a geographical rather than temporal perspective and shifting the focus of the study of non-Western international systems from differences to similarities. It also suggests a potential revision of scholarly understandings of discontinuity before and after the Meiji Restoration in Japan.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"255 - 282"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45758325","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 : 2022-10-31DOI: 10.1177/13540661221133976
Regan Burles
The domestic analogy is an old but persistent problem in theories of international politics. This paper examines the problem in the work of Immanuel Kant, whose political writings are often cited as a paradigmatic example of the analogy between individuals and states. Attention to Kant’s own conception of analogy, however, shows that the political writings are structured by another “domestic analogy”—between international and cosmopolitan right. This analogy, I argue, is based on a correspondence between the systematic unity of the international and the spherical globe, the figure that for Kant represents the boundaries of world order. International and cosmopolitan right are thus distinguished on the basis of a geopolitical criterion: the global scope of international order. This analogy of order, the paper argues, thus works to domesticate world politics through the structural form of international order. To the extent that contemporary theories of international relations rely on this conception of order, they accept Kant’s answer to the problem of perpetual peace. The paper concludes by drawing broader conclusions from the analysis about the domestic analogy, international order, and world politics.
{"title":"Kant’s domestic analogy: international and global order","authors":"Regan Burles","doi":"10.1177/13540661221133976","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221133976","url":null,"abstract":"The domestic analogy is an old but persistent problem in theories of international politics. This paper examines the problem in the work of Immanuel Kant, whose political writings are often cited as a paradigmatic example of the analogy between individuals and states. Attention to Kant’s own conception of analogy, however, shows that the political writings are structured by another “domestic analogy”—between international and cosmopolitan right. This analogy, I argue, is based on a correspondence between the systematic unity of the international and the spherical globe, the figure that for Kant represents the boundaries of world order. International and cosmopolitan right are thus distinguished on the basis of a geopolitical criterion: the global scope of international order. This analogy of order, the paper argues, thus works to domesticate world politics through the structural form of international order. To the extent that contemporary theories of international relations rely on this conception of order, they accept Kant’s answer to the problem of perpetual peace. The paper concludes by drawing broader conclusions from the analysis about the domestic analogy, international order, and world politics.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"501 - 522"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46366537","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：