Search

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]

Combines the insights of constructivist theory with the growing recognition that ideologies are important to the constitution and behavior of U.S. political parties. Assessment of the connections between ideology and foreign policy, parties and foreign policy and partisanship and ideology in the U.S.; Theoretical implications of the growing ideological partisanship in the U.S.; Suggestions of the terms ideology and worldview.

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.

Despite the divide in ethical theorizing between deontological and consequentialist traditions, I argue that for most international relations scholars concerned with ethical argument, the deontological and the consequentialist concerns are intimately linked. One reason that many constructivist norms scholars have focused so clearly on careful empirical research is that we believe (at least implicitly) that we need to know something about the empirical consequences of norms in order to judge their ethical desirability. But we lack more explicit and systematic guidelines about how to link principles and consequences in ethical argument. My discussion examines related questions of consequences, comparison, and counterfactuals to try to offer some insights for normative thinking from the realm of empirical constructivism. I illustrate my arguments with reference to two current human rights issues: the debate over the U.S. use of torture and the debate over the impact of the increasing use of global human rights trials. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [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 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.

x ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Constructivism underscores the significance of identity in international relations. Scholars from this theoretical tradition have pointed out how identity, interests, and action are interlaced. This paper starts at that point, and seeks to examine whether great power behavior is shaped by a pursuit of interests (as emphasized by the Realists) while at the same time also being influenced by a pursuit of its identity â€" that of a great power. The paper will consider the characteristics of such an identity in the case of two states: United States and Great Britain. These two cases will be explored to determine the extent to which their identities as great powers can also help us understand the actions undertaken by these states. In other words, were their actions driven by interests alone, or are they better understood as being motivated by interests plus by their identities as great powers? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Hamdan v. Rumfeld, the US Supreme Court was presented with a panoply of issues relating to the current applicability of the laws of war to the challenges posed in the Global War on Terror. This paper will explore the problems posed by the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War and other rules established by customary international law, as the Court seeks to resolve questions relating to the manner in which detainees are being treated by the United States. To do this, the paper will apply both classical legal positivism and constructivism. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the early 1990s Colombia has seen a steady and progressive deterioration of its internal armed conflict. As the fighting among the parties and the number of and extent of the abuses perpetrated against civilians have intensified, the negative externalities of the war (i.e., the creation of refugee flows, arms smuggling, armed parties cross-border raids) have ostensibly threatened to internationalize Colombia?s conflict. This pattern has been reinforced by intervention of the United States, which has provided important military aid to the Colombian government since the inception of Plan Colombia (1997). Contradicting the general argument brought forward in the literature on armed conflict; however, in the case of Colombia a direct intervention of neighboring countries including Brazil, Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador and Panama has been conspicuously absent. Based on constructivist theory, this paper argues that neighboring states have refrained from intervening as a result of widely shared norms, most prominently non- intervention in the internal affairs of bordering states, a practice that has gradually been internalized by Latin American states since World War II. As an alternative explanation, the paper posits that neighboring states have steered clear from meddling in Colombia?s internal quagmire to avoid antagonizing the region?s Hegemon, the United States. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the preferences of international mediators. In general, mediator preferences are seldom the focus of discussion. Indeed, in much of the literature on international mediation, questions concerning the formation of interests are often taken for granted. The common assumption is that mediators are foremost concerned with facilitating any agreement that is acceptable to the disputants. However, drawing on insights from constructivism and organizational theory, this paper argues that the preferences of international mediators are also shaped by the social and normative context in which they operate. To this end, a mediator may behave in ways that do not maximize the probability of agreement in order to seek peace settlements that meet certain international standards of appropriateness. Put another way, an international mediator is both a peacemaker and a norm enforcer. And, in enforcing norms, a mediator narrows the negotiating space within which bargaining takes place. Furthermore, to demonstrate the plausibility of this argument, this paper examines the effects of the territorial integrity norm on the mediation efforts of European Union envoy David Owen and US envoy Richard Holbrook during the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina between 1991 and 1995. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to understand the origins of the US invasion of Iraq using a constructivist approach. More generally, it is an attempt to integrate constructivism into the mainstream empirical-rationalist framework that dominates IR theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]