Search

The main argument of this paper is that the so-called 'Paris School' of security studies cannot account for practices of resistance because of the way it conceptualizes the 'everyday' as the arena of un-intentional actions. After briefly reviewing some of the main arguments of the 'Paris School', the paper engages in a discussion about oppositional agency to security practices. I suggest that resistance to security has a specificity of its own when compared to general practices of resistance. Further on, the paper traces the main theoretical 'roots' of the 'Paris School', analysing how Michel Foucault, Pierre Bourdieu, Michel de Certeau and James Scott conceptualize the 'everyday', and how this is translated into a vision about agency that leaves out intentionality. Such a vision, I argue, is bound to remain incomplete, and is unable to constitute a coherent theoretical vision about resistance. As a substitute, I suggest the critique of the everyday as developed by Henri Lefebvre, with its emphasis on the transformation of everyday life and its focus on the festival. For Lefebvre, the festival is the ultimate expression of oppositional agency, since it is able to substitute for the alienation of everyday life. I contribute to this theoretical discussion by bringing two examples of such transformations of everyday life: tactical frivolity and 'temporary autonomous zones'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper addresses the multiple disconnects separating neorealist international relations theory and the practice of foreign policy. Below, several of these that have already received great attention by scholars in the field are very briefly summarized. For example, neorealists carefully separate IR theory from foreign policy analysis. One cannot say much about the behavior of a single state, they repeatedly warn, based on a systemic IR theory. Foreign policy, neorealists acknowledge, is likely to reflect elements of domestic politics as well as international constraints. Then, much greater scrutiny is directed at an important disconnect that has not received close examination ? the divergence between the neorealist theory of international politics and the real world practice of American neorealists who often assume prominent roles in academic and policy debates about US foreign relations. Based on neorealist participation in these academic and policy debates, as well as the scholars? own explanation of their role in these controversies, the paper concludes that these neorealists arguably embrace reflective, communicative, and emancipatory notions of foreign policy decision-making. These are, of course, foundational theoretical concerns of constructivist and critical international relations theorists and are often disparaged by neorealists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper analyzes the impact of the Western system of values on the post-communist identity change process that has taken place in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) during the last 15 years. The main point is that an extended set of values has to be taken into consideration. To the classical democracy- and capitalism-related values it should be added a security-related set of principles originating in the Helsinki Final Act?s Decalogue. The paper starts by putting the CEE process of identity change in relation to the creation and functioning of a security regime. The origin and structure of the system of values associated with this regime are described. This is followed by a quantitative evaluation of its diffusion in former communist countries. Then, the causes of this uneven geographical distribution are analyzed. Finally, the concluding remarks summarize the main findings of the paper emphasizing the hegemonic role (in a Gramscian sense) of the Western system of values in CEE. All these steps use an approach inspired by Wendt?s identity-based constructivism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decades constructivism has moved from the margins to the centre of IR/IPE. Therefore the contentious issue is no longer whether or not one can use constructivism in IPE. Rather, the question is how to make the best possible use of constructivism in IR/IPE. This paper makes an argument in favour of a sociological version of constructivism (drawing heavily on the work of Pierre Bourdieu) which is particularly well suited to develop questions and answers for empirical studies in IR/IPE. The reason is that, although this approach cannot overcome and resolve the central dichotomies in social theory, it suggests ways which make it possible to argue in parallel and to keep both sides of the dichotomies within the analysis. The paper provides three illustrations of this. The first is that the approach focuses both on power entailed by the social construction of meaning both at the level of the level of the ideas expressed by policy maker and/or observer in the public realm and at the level of the private, material action. The second is that it suggests a way of keeping an explicit link between the instrumental use of ideas and the taken for granted dimension of social reality. The third is that the approach stresses the significance of reflexivity both for critical knowledge and for the reproduction of social hierarchies. The focus on power, agency and reflexivity is not fortuitous. It is around these issues that the critique of constructivists, from outsiders and insiders alike, tends to focus and therefore when discussing how to make the best possible use of constructivism, it is from these issues that one has to depart. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses the applicability of foreign policy analysis (FPA) to studying the European Union’s global policy. It argues that problem-based globalism (PBG) can bridge the concerns of FPA and the study of the EU’s external relations. The two basic theses of PBG are: the structuration and course of international politics already predominantly is and in the future will decisively be determined by the aggravation of global problems, and that the IR discipline is developing towards new cohesion, resulting from the increasing attraction of the globalist problem orientation. Based on constructivism the paper emphasizes that the foreign policy does not exist independently of human action and cognition but, rather, the world of IR is a social world whose rules and practices are made and reproduced by human interactions. Thus, ideas and knowledge play a significant role in explaining the evolution of global policy. Global threats are giving rise to a new kind of mental orientation to life and politics. This new thinking culture is generally characterised by high attention and priority given to global problems and action, as contrasted with traditional nationalist and regional ways of thinking. This paper challenges the state-centricity assumption of foreign policy analysis. While recognizing the multiplicity of global actors, this paper pays special attention to the globalization of the foreign policies of states, groupings of states and integration communities (EU) as presumably the main precondition for essential improvement of global policy-making. The EU seems to be even more capable of acting in world politics than most states ? at least some issue areas. Rationality assumption is also challenged, because the EU does not always know how they should act. Under the conditions of aggravated global problems, it is especially receptive to learn why we are in trouble and what would be an appropriate strategy to manage the global problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Constructivism in IR, moderate and radical versions alike, suffers from a superficial understanding of language: Looking only at argumentation and content (what is being said), it overlooks that reality is also being constructed below the surface of texts: it does make a difference, how I say something. Style matters! The proposed paper will point to the crucial role metaphors play in this regard: Metaphors create reality by projecting everyday life-worlds onto international relations. They make sense of and give meaning to strange material phenomena such as the fall of the Berlin wall or the WTC-towers. My paper will come up with a method of analysing metaphors that builds on two strands of literature: post-structuralist theories of discourse on the one hand and sociology of knowledge on the other. In order to illustrate how the method works on the empirical ground, it will be applied to the discourse on EU-enlargement, showing that and how enlargement-metaphors construct European identity. Against this background the paper will finally reflect upon linguistic mechanisms of identity construction more generally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper proposes the elements that a structurationist theory in international relations should include. A structurationist theory incorporates both constructivism and historical sociology. The virtue of a structurationist approach is that it is conscious of the need to avoid ontological primacy of either agents or structures. Both agents and structures should be composed of explicit constitutive rules. Rules can only be instantiated by agents, individually or in combination. Thus all the rules of a structure must be distributed among agents. Outside the medium of agents, structures can have no rules. Agents, or subjects, should be built to construct situations, generate actions, and update memories. Subjects' memories may be intersubjective or exclusive. Memories can consist of identities, recently advocated norms, or descriptions with history-sensitive confidence levels. Structures should be defined as combinations of practices and rules that reproduce themselves. Wendt's 1992 diagram of the codetermination of institutions and processes is a helpful illustration of how subjects and structures can be modeled. Four constructivist empirical analyses are shown to contain the requisite elements of structurationist models and to fit Wendt's diagram. The paper concludes with three methodological imperatives. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that IR has tended to mischaracterise the 'social' basis of international society. States and other actors orient their behaviour towards shared understandings of cooperation not because of a prior common identity but because the provision of public goods provides a high value pay-off in terms of status. In the early part of the paper, we draw on Wittgenstein's ideas on rule indeterminacy to critique the idea of the causal power of norms, a view which animates a great deal of mainstream constructivism. Working with an alternative sociology of norms, it becomes possible to view the international social system as being produced through 'recognition games' played on many different boards. The goal of international social action is recognition of rightful membership of institutions and alliances, an argument familiar to English school writings in IR. China's struggle for status in contemporary international society provides an illustrative case study, one which avoids the stark choice between managing China's imminent threat (realism) or liberal socialization (constructivism). ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper offers a preliminary conceptualization of a theory of nonhegemonic international orders (NHIO). To varying degrees, IR theories, including realism, liberalism, constructivism, and Gramscian critical theory have privileged hegemonic power and socialization in international order-building. Nonhegemonic international order theory (NHIOT) holds that international order is not simply a function of the power and preferences of hegemonic actors (or powerful states). A nonhegemonic order may be defined as a relative stable pattern of interactions without the individual or collective hegemony of great powers. NHIOT makes the following assumptions: (a) the main actors/agents in international relations are states, social groups, and international organizations; (b) the international system is an anarchy but hegemony is not a natural or inevitable solution to anarchy; resistance to hegemony may be a more a natural tendency; (c) the structure of the international system is both material and ideational and hence resistance to hegemony can be both material and ideational; (d) international cooperation is possible not only to organize resistance to, but also the socialization of, hegemony-seeking actors; and (e) nonhegemonic actors are not just passive recipients of universal ideas or collective goods, but active borrowers and exporters. The paper offers some examples of nonhegemonic international orders such as the diffusion of Indian political ideas in precolonial Asia, the Chinese tributary system, European Union’s security community, and Indonesia’s postcolonial role within Southeast Asia. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper deals with the formation of women's rights institutions in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). It challenges the tacit assumption found in most studies that reforms towards democratization and state-building in BiH are invariably imposed by the international community. I argue in this paper that this rationalist assumption presents us with a biased view on policy-making in BiH, impeding a more comprehensive understanding of how policy-making works in states that are subject to an international post-war intervention. The analysis of the formation of women's rights institutions in BiH reveals agency structures and leverage mechanisms that have largely been neglected in explanations of innovative policy change in BiH. The case supports a constructivist argument emphasising the power of domestic norm entrepreneurs as well as less hierarchical mechanisms of persuasion, capacity-building and cooperation. However, these domestic norm entrepreneurs also relied on external allies that helped them access relevant decision-makers and institutional processes by providing necessary resources and advice. The findings of this study do not only point to alternative strategies for international organizations beyond enforcement and withdrawal, they also introduce constructivist thinking into explanations of policy change under conditions of an international post-war intervention such as in BiH. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a paper on how to study international norms. The notion of norms is quite common in the work of the English School, yet only a few scholars offer an explicit definition of an international norm and even fewer an operationalisation. Using English School theory on norms as well as insight from constructivism, this paper offers a theoretical and methodological account of the study of international norms. Hence, the paper answers questions such as "what is an international norm", "do norms matter at all in international politics", "how do international norms work", and finally but equally important "how do one measure international norms" Thus, this paper is a first attempt to make a sound, explicit research design on how to study international norms. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The agent-structure debate was a debate entered into in the 80s and 90s, but has now silenced. This is largely the case also within constructivism, despite it being the approach that introduced the concept of the mutual constitution of agents and structures. This paper claims that the lack of attention to this fundamental theoretical aspect is diminishing the potential contributions the so-called "bridge building project" between rationalism and constructivism can make to contemporary IR. Today, the project has no metatheoretical fundaments common to both approaches, and is based largely on methodological inventions and theoretical pragmatism. Thus, there exist no theoretical bridge building, and the pragmatic-methodological approach leads to theoretical inconsistencies. Taking as the substantial point of departure the recent International Organization special issue "International Institutions and Socialization in Europe", this paper identifies four concrete problems arising form the lack of theoretical clarity. These are the problem of combining an exclusive use of positivism with constructivism, the conceptualization of mechanisms, the exclusion of interpretative approaches and the rationalist dominance. These problems contribute to the notion of the project as a bridge over troubled theoretical waters. The paper shows how one could approach these problems through revisiting the insights from the agent-structure debate. Values and facts could be reconceptualized as mutually sustaining, mechanisms could be seen as processes and not one-time influences and structures consist of both material and ideational aspects. This new approach might open the ground for a more theoretical coherent and resilient bridge building project. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the 1990s constructivism has played an important role in the theoretical debate between IR-scholars. This debate not only concerns systemic theory, but has extended to the FPA-field as well. However, empirical research to buttress constructivist theoretical claims is less profound.Although some empirical work has been done, mostly using quantitative discourse and content analysis, it is important to note that constructivists themselves seem to agree on this point. Someone like Maja Zehfuss is very critical of the social constructivists’ empirical efforts, which in her view remain “abstract”, “leave(s) off before getting to the practicalities” and provide “little to work with for those wishing to analyze what is construed as the political reality of international politics” (Zehfuss 2002: 33). A prominent constructivist like Jeffrey Checkel, in his review of Zehfuss’ book, agrees that “this seems an accurate assessment” (2003: 8). This paper discusses the usefulness of combining ‘new’ constructivist theoretical concepts with more ‘traditional’ qualitative case study research in the diplomatic history tradition, even though constructivist seem to dislike investigating ‘hard’ primary sources and dismiss it as too ‘rationalist’ and too ‘elitist’. Applying constructivist concepts of ‘critical junctures’ (Risse 1999: 155-156) and ‘moral entrepreneurs’ (Finnemore 1996: 24-28) to the development of West German ‘Ostpolitik’ under Chancellor Willy Brandt, the paper takes an absolute ‘most likely case’ (Eckstein 1975) to investigate their empirical foundations. Doing so not only contributes to reducing the gap between constructivist theory and empirical IR-research but also brings IR theory and diplomatic history closer together. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is part of a larger project that compares three anti-racist campaigns - that of Football Against Racism in Europe (FARE), that of the American Ad Council, and that of the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala (MINUGUA). The project was motivated by the observation that all three campaigns were initiated in relative haste, with little or no planning, and were devised to respond to perceived crises. They also were just a few examples of a number of anti-racist campaigns that have become increasingly prominent features of contemporary international relations. Therefore, the central question of the project is "Why anti-racist campaigning?" If these initiatives are launched in a hurry, with hardly any similar precedence in international relations, and little idea of their chances of success, why then are so much money, time and other resources invested in them? In short, what are the cultural politics of these antiracist campaigns? The project theorizes this relatively new phenomenon in international relations in order to understand: (a) the wider historical and political context; (b) the agency of all those involved; and (c) the meaning of this practice to contemporary international relations. This paper is a discreet comparison of two of the three cases - FARE and the AD Council. It shows that the Constructivist paradigm is particularly helpful in arriving at a more sophisticated understanding of these two phenomena. Textual analysis is used to show how anti-racism in the two cases is part of wider discourses on nationalism. The anti-racist campaigns are, therefore, important artifacts in pantomimes of identity politics, not by people, but by a state (the United States, in the case of the "War on Terror") and a regional body (UEFA, in the case of FARE). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International Relations' constructivist approaches seem to have reached a consensus on the fact that looking at national interests and identities as constructed is important for understanding international politics' dynamics. Gaps remain, however, on explaining how such interests/identities are actually defined and what is the link between the national and international dimensions. The paper argues that the process through which the national actors' understanding of the world translates into political change at the international level cannot be explained by looking at state actors alone. Applying a multidisciplinary perspective, combining international relations with the methodological tools of political communications and discourse analysis, the study attempts at providing an empirical account of the mechanisms explaining political interests' construction at the international level. More specifically, by drawing on the case study of the War on Terrorism, the paper argues that: 1) the media have an impact on political discourses' development, i.e. the media play a role in how political interests are constructed 2) there is an interaction between/among political and media discourses at transnational level: i.e. the construction of international politics is the result of complex cross-national discoursive exchanges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A principal area in which mainstream constructivists have advanced our knowledge of international relations is by addressing normative diffusion. Principles flow outward from a core of normative consensus to a periphery that, over time, comes to accept and endorse the norms. While constructivists anticipate resistance to normative diffusion, the implicit story they tell is a teleological one, and the outcome is normative convergence and the long-term resolution of normative conflicts. Moreover, while careful to point out that constructivism (as a body of theory) is neutral as to whether good or bad norms prevail, in practice constructivists have disproportionately focused on consensus around progressive norms, and more often than not they endorse the normative changes in question. In this paper, we challenge constructivists by arguing that conflict over some of the most fundamental norms of international society is likely to remain entrenched and irreconcilable over time, perhaps indefinitely. We take as our theoretical point of departure John Rawls’s writings on domestic and international political liberalism. Rawls provides a useful analytic framework with which to engage the problem of normative convergence, in two ways. First, he presents a compelling account of human psychology, showing how and why free institutions generate an irreconcilable multiplicity of moral, philosophical, and theological doctrines (what he calls ?comprehensive doctrines?). Thus, Rawls clearly defines a conceptual boundary that must be overcome if we are to be convinced that anything beyond the very thin normative convergence he envisions is possible. Second, when he extends his political liberalism to the international level, he has to make some heroic assumptions in order to make even a thin conception of normative convergence possible, assumptions that we do not find compelling. Therefore, we have reason to believe that normative conflict will be even more problematic at the international level than at the domestic level. In sum, we accept the basic terms of Rawls? political and moral psychology but argue that even his narrow account of convergence is implausible. Normative conflict will remain a problem at the international level. Therefore, the primary question is: How do we learn to live in a world where others do not share our values? We argue that realism provides an answer to this question. Just as liberal theorists resort to checks and balances at the domestic level to mitigate conflict, realists have consistently argued against over-reaching at the international level, however normatively driven, because of the violence that could follow. Because they anticipate resistance, realists warn against privileging moral considerations in foreign policy and the aggressive foreign policies that result. Again, live and let live is the best the world can do. This, we think more reasonable, set of assumptions about normative change allows us to recover the non-utopian liberal potential inherent in realist theories of international politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A primary indicator of a fair and legitimate process is whether those most affected are afforded meaningful opportunities for participation. Indeed, the right to participation in decision-making is a core principle of human rights law. Organizations holding a privileged role in the development of human rights ? including intergovernmental bodies such as the UN and non-governmental such as Human Rights Watch ? are increasingly subjected to scrutiny by reference to principles of legitimacy and are called to account for what they say and the locus of their authority for saying it. While constructivism has usefully examined questions of legitimacy and accountability in relation to core segments of human rights practice, IR offers little in the way of empirical research regarding the actual development of human rights law. This paper extends constructivist analysis to explore whether and how NGO power holders in UN human rights treaty processes apply principles of legitimacy and accountability in their leadership. It provides a case study of the newest UN human rights treaty initiative regarding disabled persons and identifies factors that facilitate or impede meaningful NGO participation, assesses the role of the UN in shaping NGO influence and suggests how such issues ultimately bear upon treaty implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dialogue of civilizations may have significant practical and theoretical implications for international relations at different levels including ontological, epistemological, sociological, and normative. It is, however, theoretically underdeveloped. This idea can hardly be incorporated into the realist paradigm of international relations due to its dialogical, non-statist, and non-power-political aspects. It seems, however, that the English School, constructivism, and critical international theory can be the best theoretical contexts for understanding and conceptualizing the theoretical contribution of dialogue of civilizations. This paper attempts to clarify this contribution. On the basis of its emphasis on civilization and its characteristics, the idea of dialogue of civilizations can alter the state-centric conception of international relations. It may also function as a basis for non Euro-centric approaches to international relations both as the social context in which the interactions among actors take place and as the discipline in which these interactions are to be conceptualized, interpreted, and explained. Its dialogical character represents a multi-layered mechanism for setting international agenda and resolving international conflicts. It can also be seen as a way towards the formation of a new worldwide moral community based on a worldwide dialogue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars increasingly represent Anglo-American international relations theory as a three-cornered fight between realism, liberalism, and constructivism, describing each as paradigms or research programs. Although the three paradigms understanding of international relations theory has some heuristic value, that value is outweighed by the costs for cumulative knowledge in the field. Whatever else they may be, realism, liberalism, and constructivism should not be understood through post-positivist models of scientific evolution. In this paper we propose an alternative heuristic for mapping general approaches to international politics. First, to what degree do theories and approaches hold that anarchy is a fixed constraint on actors in the international system? Second, to what degree do theories and approaches hold that power can be transcended in international politics? Re-mapping the discipline as we suggests reveals some strange bedfellows. Specifically, it shows that the ‘three-cornered’ debate between realism, liberalism, and constructivism is, at minimum, a ‘four-cornered’ fight in which variants of constructivism share at least as much in common with realist theories as with liberal and other constructivist approaches. This realist constructivism is characterized by a focus on the ongoing role of power understood in a relational sense in producing outcomes in world politics. We flesh out this fourth contender, with a special emphasis on the methodological strategies utilized by realist constructivism to produce knowledge that is qualitatively distinct from that produced by any of the other three contenders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why has there been no confrontation or conflict among big powers after the Cold War? Neither structural realism nor constructivism can offer satisfactory answer. This paper attempts to find an answer to this puzzle by going back to the unit level to explo ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a two-tiered, constructivist theoretical and methodological framework for analysing how international law influences specific (foreign policy) decision-making processes. Taking the linguistic turn seriously, the first tier explores h ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper addresses four related questions: why do norms of military practice develop, spread, gain acceptance, and become internalized? Why are accepted norms sometimes abandoned in favour of contradictory norms? Why did many state leaders become convin ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I develop a realist-constructivist theory to explain the limited nature of European social policy when significant efficiencies could be achieved through a significant transfer from the national to the European level. To explain how European social policy has been institutionalized in this way, the re-launch of social policy by interstate negotiations in Single European Act and the Maastricht Treaty. I seek to combine rational and sociological approaches by synthesizing realist intergovernmentalism and social constructivism. The initial genesis of the Single European Act and Maastricht Treaty can be explained by an intergovernmental explanation. Because of their favorable balance of power within the European Council, the most powerful member states determine the direction of the integration process. Additionally, the integration process has been marked by relative gains concerns. The intergovernmental nature of the integration process, with states calculating the relative gains, has becomes a reified, unquestioned part of the European integration. The state interests for social policy integration were socially constructed through phenomenological and symbolic interactions. Intersubjective structural processes have generated both European and national identities, which promote interests for continued cooperation that allows for national autonomy. The routinized, habitual interactions among the national elites, as agents, reproduce the European social policy as an intersubjective structure. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a constructivist and discourse-analytic study of 'postnational identity', though positing Michel Foucault's category of 'subject-position' to be a better analytical tool than 'identity'. By deploying this analytical approach, I problematize both national and postnational conceptions of identity as essentialist discursive constructions. To the contrary, I argue that the constitution of the self is not structurally-defined, either by a national or postnational sociocultural context. Instead, individuals continue to have significant capacity to constitute themselves through the articulation of subject-positions that they choose to adopt. The second key component of my analysis is to demonstrate that different levels of analysis can be deployed to analyse such issues, especially for purposes of methodological triangulation and hypothesis testing. However, the nation-state level of analysis is not a sufficient starting-point for hypothesizing about the construction of a new, postnational constitution of the self. The latter also is an insufficient basis for asserting essentialist generalizations about contemporary practices of the self. The individual-self level must be considered the core focus of analysis in this context, though it is important to consider exogenous, material influences on self-constitution. This is where studies conducted at other levels of analysis are useful. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the contested process of Asian regionalism with a specific focus on the question of why East Asia has not succeeded in establishing a formally institutionalized regional scheme. To answer this question, I seek to establish a 'bridge-building enterprise' between realism and constructivism. Unlike other regions, increasing economic interdependence has not developed into formal regional institutionalization in East Asia because political factors including power relations (for example, hegemonic competition between China and Japan, the unresolved historical legacy of Japan, and the region's economic and political dependence on the US) have prevailed over economic logic in the region. Although Asia-only regionalism has emerged since the Asian Financial Crisis in the late 1990s in the form of ASEAN + 3 or the East Asian Summit, the progress of it has been very slow in part because major powers in the region have not been able to agree to the boundary of the region or the membership of a new regional initiative. In other words, political struggles in the region have developed into identity struggles. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of my paper is to understand the transformation in security management with the case study of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) of the European Union. I want to suggest another way of understanding ESDP beyond analysis of discourses and official documents. From my point of view, combining critical constructivist and sociological approaches present the most relevant path of thought for my study. If ESDP enters officially in an intergovernmental logic, in fact, it is no longer the exclusive field of the member States, but rather the result of social interactions between a broad variety of public and private actors at the national, transnational and European levels. So, we must look at the interactions, roles, aims and means of these actors which give indications on new security practices, processes and issues, the heuristic value is higher. I am looking at the practices of security with framework of critical security studies and with theoretical and methodological means of the political sociology which permit the analysis of sociology, socio-professional trajectories, taking role, struggles of position, inter-institutional games and process of identity construction of European actors, suggesting emergence at European level of a new socio-political space. At the moment, critical security studies focus of immigration policy and political sociology on social matters. I want to demonstrate that we can combine these two approaches to understand security and defence making process too, with the case of ESDP. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Carl Schmitt's writings grapple with the perennial issues of world politics: war, nationalism, identity, and the nature of the international system. Yet, few contemporary international relations scholars engage with his work. This paper aims to stoke interest in Schmitt by posing two questions: What is Schmitt's theory of IR, and how might it further debates within the field? I argue that Schmitt's thinking contains elements of classical realism, structural realism, and constructivism. Yet Schmitt should be categorized as a "political identity realist" because his underlying assumption of a hardwired human need for political identity drives his story about international relations. The "value-added" of Schmitt's work arises from its ability to engage Wendtian constructivism and highlight the flaws in Wendt's understanding of identity. Whereas Wendt's inclusion-based view of identity implies it could help transform the international system into a better world, Schmitt's exclusion-based perspective reveals it to be an inescapable curse. Schmitt's work therefore upholds realist assertions that continuity, not change, best characterizes world politics. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the conference paper "Foreign Policy Role from the Constructivist and Power Cycle Perspectives" prepared for delivery at the "46th Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association" held in Honolulu, Hawaii on March 3, 2005. It argues that the power cycle model of Charles Doran provides a springboard to a neorealist and constructivist synthesis that is said to be needed if international relations theory is to have relevance for policy makers.

The article presents the conference paper titled "Constructivist Ethics as Oxymoron" prepared for the annual meeting of the International Studies Association held in Honolulu, Hawaii in March 2005. It examines the role of ethics in social constructivism within the realm of international relations theory. It discusses the three ethical prescriptions of how constructivist analysts must behave in world politics.

Addresses the intentional exclusion of the U.S. from Asian regionalism in the 21st century. Information on the constructivist approach of theorizing regionalism; Evolution of Asian regional cooperation; Difference of emphasis on the main institutional purpose of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Conference between the U.S. and Asian member states.

I present a theoretical synthesis of constructivist IR theory with dialectical theory of the Hegelian tradition to illuminate systems theories of international relations. I critique debates among Frankfurt School dialecticians and positivists, and demonstrate that when stripped of Marxist epistemological and ontological commitments attending the notion of the concrete reality in which Marxist proponents argue dialectical analysis must be situated, Frankfurt School dialectical theory largely mirrors social constructivist arguments in IR theory, and helps explain constitutive and transformative processes in historical international systems. I draw upon a recent constructivist work and employ a recent constructivist study of sovereignty to argue that dialectical analysis may be employed to explain macro-historical transformation in international systems as constitutive process, even while causal processes may be traced at the micro-historical level. By eradicating Marxist assumptions we can benefit and learn from the insights of Hegel without embracing the materialist ontology of Marx. The article concludes by demonstrating the utility of the predictive inference of a reconstituted dialectics, coupled with the Weberian heuristic device of the ideal type, to generate systems theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the theme of 'disciplining dissent' by examining how dissenting conduct is channeled into 'acceptable' and 'productive' practices. To this end, it uses Michel Foucault's framework of 'government' in order to highlight the operations of a diffuse and generalized form of 'disciplining', where this refers to the directing or 'structur[ing] the field of action of others' (1982: 221). Through this framework, the article illuminates that subjects do not cease to be governed when they undertake certain practices customarily categorized as 'resistance' or 'dissent'. On the contrary, the article explores how dissenting practice itself 'disciplines' the conduct of subjects. The article analyses the pivotal role played in this by processes of subjectification, highlighting how 'governing' (dissenting) behavior may well require the incitation of forms of subjectivity, and ways of being, that are open to such acceptable forms of dissenting and resisting. The article examines the case of Botswana's Bushmen and their attempts to resist and revoke their relocation by the Government of Botswana from the Central Kalahari Game Reserve since 2002 as an important contemporary site illustrative of the interplay of governing, dissent and subjectification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why would state actors support innovation within one of its subsidiary bodies and object to it in another? We employ social constructivist and rational propositions, respectively on intergovernmental organization (IO) agency and their control mechanisms, to the Secretariat of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and the Convention's Global Mechanism. We argue that state actors' ability to coalesce into a collective principal during the organization's establishment, and to agree on its core mission and role, have a strong bearing on the future behavior of an IO. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What reduces international anarchy and promotes cooperation? Structural realism believes in the balanced distribution of material capabilities; neoliberal institutionalism, international institutions; and structural constructivism, friendlier ideational s ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The English School (ES) is a historical, institutional and legal approach to world politics focusing on human beings and their political values. In the centre of the approach we find the study of ideas and ideologies shaping world politics. In spite of it ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the many areas of investigation within the discipline of International Relations in which constructivist theory has made a major impact is in that regarding the concept of strategic culture. Furthermore, work on strategic culture â€" that set of nor ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay aims to expand the concept of amity and enmity within Regional Security Complex Theory. In an initial meta-theoretical discussion as to the appropriate framework for this expansion - taking into account the theory’s fundamentally hybrid, material/ideational nature - positivist and constructivist approaches are considered, and a Wendtian framework is chosen as the suitable ‘via media’ scaffolding for this task. The amity/enmity variable in regional security is subsequently conceptualised as a series of ideal-type categories of anarchic culture (revisionist or status-quo conflict formations/thin or thick security regimes/loose or tight security communities). Macro- and micro-level methodologies are subsequently elaborated for the categorisation of Regional Security Complexes within this framework, the former based on the identification of objective, region-wide epiphenomenal criteria, the latter involving the study of discursive, unit- and sub-unit level processes of securitisation. Within these micro-level discursive processes, a distinction is made between ends-directed and means-directed aspects of security discourse - the former relating to the reasoned choice of values as referent objects of security, the latter encompassing the rational selection of security-enhancing strategies based on techno-scientific knowledge prevalent within society; on this micro-level, amity and enmity is accordingly conceived of in terms of the varying compatibility between or congruence of these ends- and means-directed aspects of securitisation. The notion of discursive stability - the groundedness of discourse in prevailing regional and domestic material and social structures - is subsequently introduced to account for possible changes in regional patterns of amity and enmity. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay investigates why the United Nations , as the embodiment of the international community,has not been a more effective instrument in preventing and stopping genocide,and the implications of its failure to do so for the law of genocide.It analyzes the implementation of the law of genocide through four major theoretical approaches to international relations;(1)realism/neorealism(2)liberal internationalism/idealism(3)constructivism(4)the English School of International RelationsThe essay concludes that the English School of International Relations provides us with the best explanation of the failure of the international community to implement the law of genocide. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This exploratory article seeks to identify angles for theory-guided research on European responses to terrorism. It is argued that when placed within the historical context of its own trajectory in the area of border politics, especially the experiences related to the Schengen Agreement and its implementation, as well as the cross-pillar collaboration, it is possible to identify a distinct European capability. This capability is best defined as 'diversity awareness'. That is, as an actor on the world stage, the European Union can draw on transnational and trans-border experiences with law enforcement in beyond-the-state settings, as opposed to an approach based on conventional warfare in order to defend the national interest. While sympathetic to the 'normative power Europe' literature, the article's critical constructivist approach stresses reservations against the Universalist bias of that approach and proposes an approach that is more conducive towards empirical research instead. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The debate about identity contributed to strengthen the role conferred to statism in the discipline. That is so because the major proponent of this debate, constructivism of the via media, is based on a materialist ontology that allows it to consider the corporate identity of the state as an ontological prior platform from which the social identity is constructed. By their turn, many post-structuralists emphasize the performativity of the state, and argue that its identity is delimitated through contingent practices of exclusion. While poststructuralism does not accept that state identity is separate from social practices, state border is demarcated apart from the outside, which endow it with a sense of existence in its own right. In doing so, both approaches are locked in what Bartelson calls the 'statism trap' in international relations theory: the state-centric logic dominates the way we think about international relations, because it renders this thinking possible. In this sense, statism helps to reproduce the boundaries of the discipline and to deny legitimacy to actors that do not cognitively fit in it. In order to escape this trap, one might search beyond the disciplinary boundaries as it is traditionally conceived. Due to its critical perspective on the consenquences of state-centric IR and its diverse point of departure, post-colonialism could be a promising alternative. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article argues that realists need a theory of emotion if they are to understand the depth and dynamism of contemporary threats to international security. I look to the tradition of classical realism, whose 'biological' account of human aggression has been too readily dismissed in recent revivals. Focusing on Hans Morgenthau and Reinhold Niebuhr, I argue that early realists understood emotion as both a biological and a social force; as such they offer valuable contribution to current debates between realism and constructivism in IR theory. These classical realists were mistaken, however, in accepting the nineteenth-century assumption that the organism of the state represents the primary site at which emotions are socially and politically expressed. If realism is to understand the social movements from which terrorist organizations draw support, it needs to restore an interest in emotion and pay special attention to the different locations and collective agencies it inspires. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In making the case for the scientific study of ideas in international politics, Alexander Wendt's version of scientific realism preserved many vestiges of the positivist model of science. In order to retain scientific legitimacy within a discipline whose philosophical vision has not yet discarded the mistaken conflation of science and positivism, Wendt constructed a middle way between the alleged positivist/interpretivist dichotomy, rather than fully rejecting both altogether and turning to the fundamentally different alternative offered by philosophical realism. This chapter will explain how the failure to complete the break with the positivist model of science, as well as the adoption of certain interpretivist positions, has distorted and undermined his presentation of scientific realism, created confusion around the content and implications of realism, and compromised the valuable philosophical potential of his wider project. Given the great importance and widespread impact of Wendt's contributions in IR to the understanding of scientific realism in particular and knowledge of philosophy of science in general, this chapter is devoted to examining, revising, and, where appropriate, correcting several components of Wendt's presentation of scientific realism, especially regarding the realist positions on ontology, epistemology, the structure-agent relationship, and the emergent, enduring, and causal properties of material and ideational social structures. The chapter finishes by discussing how Wendt's (idealist) metaphysics ended up privileging his (constructivist) substantive theory, highlighting what, for realists, are the serious repercussions of his Via Media. The intention is to maintain and further Wendt's philosophical objectives in the scientific study of "the social" while overcoming the limitations inherent in his presentation of scientific realism, and thus clarifying these vital theoretical issues for our discipline. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Constructivists came to the forefront of international relations theory with Alexander Wendt who attacked the heterodoxy of the structure-agency positions and established a core sense of ideas, establishing a strong role for the discursive formation that agents use to form and be trapped within the world, but suggesting that an independent material world existed outside of the ideas of agents. Some theorists followed Wendt, establishing the rational attachment to a materialist world; others maintained the line Wendt wanted to overcome, that the world was constructed of ideas all the way down. Though writing much about ideas, constructivists say very little about meaning (in that sense very little about ideas). Noticing this shortfall, constructivists reconstituted meaning through different socio-psychological epistemologies, such as social learning, Weberian interactionism, salience psychology, internal state constituencies, and framing. They also ported over techniques through literary theory, suggesting the role of dominant narratives through the role of deconstruction and metaphor identification-implication. In spite of their best efforts, constructivists still say very little about meaning. Using the latest cognitive linguistic literature, I suggest the role for conceptual blending within a constructivist project. I answer two basic questions: How can meaning help constructivism; how can conceptual blending establish this aid? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article attempts to look at foreign and security policy of independent Lithuania as a State identity formation process. The analysis ids based on social constructivism methodology, underlying the predominant role of immaterial factors in the development of international system. The article begins with the presentation of the Lithuanian geopolitical environment as an interaction of differently constructed identities. In this context, the place and role of Lithuania in the Northern dimension of the EU before and after the EU membership is analyzed. In analyzing Lithuanian foreign policy landmarks after the double enlargement, a wider survey of problems and perspectives of its participation in the latest EU foreign policy initiatives and its relationship with the EU Eastern dimension is given. The article states that Lithuania, trying to become the center of regional cooperation, is creating a civil; State identity assembling other States by force of the example to be followed. However, the regional identity of Lithuania is still under formation: pretensions to unite the North, South and East are conceptually not grounded enough and the narrative uniting the region is still at an embryonic stage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study that compares research and teaching of international relations (IR) among scholars in the U.S. The study was undertaken following the observation by an undergraduate student that IR scholars in their department have rejected the realist paradigm as a research guide yet continue to teach realism in introductory IR courses. Trends in IR scholarship such as the use of realist, liberalistic and constructivist paradigms and time devoted to studying each paradigm are discussed.

The article demonstrates that both rationalism and constructivism are needed to have an appropriate understanding of regional integration or regionalism in Asia. The proliferation of rationalization and the tripolarization of world economy in the context of globalization is examined. It traces out emerging contested regional identities in Asia particularly from the late 1990s to the mid-1990s. It emphasizes the importance of the investigation of the identity formation from a constructivist perspective.

The article presents a report on the social construction of the European economy. The report aims to reveal the essential discurvity of the economy to be able to reinvent and politicize political economy away from its mainstream complacency. It discusses how a constructivist approach to the economy can be developed. It concludes that the European economy is soft since claims about its existence do not cause the rational narration of a singular policy pathway or neoliberalism.

The article presents a process-tracing constructivist theory to reconstruct the interaction of the U.S., India and Pakistan between the Pakistani military coup of October 12 1999 and the al-Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001. It also discusses how concurrent autobiographical narrations of interactions by international subjects generate actions and reproduce themselves collectively. It traces the processes of reproduction of structures in international society by specifying the impact of narratives upon actions and actions upon narratives.

The article discusses a study about the global Internet taxation regime. It looks at some applicable characteristics of regime theory and constructivism as explanatory mechanisms in implementing Internet taxation. It examines a few cases of attempts to tax information flows over the Internet. It explains that the idea for an active, implemented bit tax is not effective because of lack of an international consensus on enforcement.