Search

States exist in an anarchic international system in which survival is the necessary precursor to fulfilling all of their citizens’ other interests. Yet states’ inhabitants – and the policymakers they empower – also hold social ideas about other ends that the state should value and how it should pursue them: the ‘role’ they expect their state to ‘play’ in international politics. Furthermore, such role-performative impulses can motivate external behaviours inimical to security-maximization – and thus to the state survival necessary for future interest-fulfilment. This article therefore investigates the tensions between roleplay and realpolitik in grand strategy. It does so through interrogation of four mutual incompatibilities in role-performative and realpolitikal understandings of ‘Great Powerness’, a core – but conceptually contested – international-systemic ordering unit, thereby demonstrating their necessary logical distinctiveness. The argument is illustrated with brief case studies on the United States, China, France, the United Kingdom, Germany and Japan. Identification of such security-imperilling role motives thus buttresses neoclassical realist theory; specifically, as an account of strategic deviation from the security-maximizing realist baseline. Such conclusions carry important implications for both scholarship and statecraft, meanwhile. For once we recognize that roleplay and realpolitik are necessarily distinct incentive structures, role motives’ advocates can no longer claim that discharging such performative social preferences necessarily bolsters survival prospects too.

Security is one of the most used and disputed concepts in the field of International Relations. Achieving security has always concerned the world, from those who hunted to ensure their food security, to those who started wars in the name of self-determination. The spotlight highlighted security, especially after the two World Wars, which led to a reconfiguration of the world. The institutionalization of the field of International Relations favored the emergence of different paradigms that aimed to identify and explain the causes of the war and to develop strategies to ensure this good. The purpose of this article is to analyze three of the best-known theories – realism, liberalism and constructivism – and to highlight the methods identified in order to achieve security. The approach will be predominantly descriptive.

Hydro politics is an important dimension of India Pakistan relations, overshadowed mainly by strategic issues between both states. Even the discussion on water issues is more focused on technical issues. However, the main question that arises is: Is hydro politics between India and Pakistan a problem of perceptions (intentions) or it forms part of overall strategic rivalry between both states? This paper discusses India-Pakistan water relations from the theoretical perspectives of (neo) realism, (neo) liberalism, constructivism, and human security school of thought. It argues that, like in general India-Pakistan political relations, it is realism/ neo-realism which still reigns supreme in explaining India-Pakistan hydro politics as well. It argues that in the wake of the Cold War, different theories emerged which undermined the traditional approaches and perspectives of realism and liberalism. These new theoretical traditions were also employed in explaining India-Pakistan political as well water relations. However, due to the competitive security of the region of South Asia in general and India-Pakistan’s security dilemma in particular, the theoretical perspectives of (neo) liberalism, constructivism, and human security fall short in theorizing India-Pakistan water relations. To answer the question posed earlier, this paper has mostly analyzed the available literature, both theoretical and related to hydro politics, to construct the argument. Therefore, this paper concludes that instead of employing (neo) liberalism, constructivism, and human security, it is realism/ neo-realism which still reigns supreme in explaining India-Pakistan political as well as water relations.

What explains the Islamic Republic of Iran’s considerable financial, military and diplomatic support for the nominally secular Bashar al-Asad government in the wake of the 2011 Syrian uprising? Ira...

This paper aims to explain the advent of the 2008 Russo-Georgian war. It is an important question to answer due to the historical, cultural, and economic relations between the two states, as well as Russia’s aspiration as a benign hegemon should have prevented the war from happening. The fact that two closely related ex-Soviet states went to war against each other points to a fundamental problem in their relationship that could happen to other states with similar preconditions, such as Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Moldova, and more. In order to address this issue, Wendtian Constructivism is used to analyse the social interaction, key events, and the culture of anarchy that led to open warfare. This paper mainly relies on official documents and previous research as the primary sources, using news and media coverage to validate truths and opinions on key events. Based on that, this paper finds that: 1) social interaction between the two states was consistent with the Hobbesian culture of anarchy; 2) Russia’s aspiration as a benign hegemon failed to reproduce itself due to rejection from Georgia and their success in balancing Russia with the U.S., giving Georgia the capabilities to resist Russian narratives; 3) Georgia’s confrontative behaviours led to reciprocal actions from Russia, and; 4) the Georgian offensive on Tskhinvali was the trigger that confirmed the suspicions from both sides, making both countries decision to be based on the logic of enmity.

Much peace and conflict scholarship groups individual international interveners together as ‘the international’, treating them more as an ideational structure – the international peace architecture...

The implementation of fracking activities in the United Kingdom that involves the pumping of water, chemicals, and sand underground to explore shale gas has caused several hazardous impacts. This situation has sparked protests from various kinds of demonstrators, both individuals and organizations. In response to the public objection to fracking activities, the British Government tended to fight back against the action. The detention of demonstrators ultimately created a pattern of limited advocacy among the public against the British Government. It has prompted an NGO called Friends of the Earth to start mobilizing these issues to the international realm by promoting principled ideas or norms to form a transnational network, aiming to influence national policy. The authors explain the transnational advocacy network's role in influencing British policy by applying the concept of Transnational Advocacy Network (TAN) from Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink. Specifically, the role is analysed based on TAN’s strategies, namely Information Politics, Symbolic Politics, Leverage Politics, and Accountability Politics. The authors also use Constructivism Theory to explain how norms and ideas can influence national policy. This research uses qualitative methods with secondary data collection techniques to describe and interpret some relevant phenomena to become an integrated explanation.

Among social scientists, constructivism has long reigned supreme in the study of ethnicity, nationality, and nationalism. Accordingly, scholars have highlighted the role of cultural framing and political choice in the definition of ethnic categories, their fluidity, and their flexible boundaries. Conversely, they have deemphasized the historical roots of ethnicity and depicted nations as the contested products of nationalist movements and political leaders and as (merely) “imagined communities” (Anderson 1991). Although constructivism encompasses a broad gamut of theories that differ in the malleability ascribed to ethnicity (Chandra 2012, 19–22, 139–49), recent authors have emphasized its susceptibility to change by highlighting manipulation by political-electoral entrepreneurs (Wilkinson 2012) and focusing on “identity in formation” (Laitin 1998), “ethnicity without groups” (Brubaker 2004), and “imagined noncommunities” characterized by “national indifference” (Zahra 2010).

This article examines the mechanism of local border traffic (LBT) at external borders of the European Union (EU) and Schengen Area in the Baltic Sea region (BSR) from the point of view of the parad...

The article deals with the concept of war in modern political realism. Realism claims to have an original notion of war, which distinguishes it from empirical war studies and from other schools in international relations theory. Realism does not have a strict formal definition of war like empirical studies do, it focuses on understanding the causes and nature of war instead. The distinction between realism and other international relations theories like idealism, Marxism or constructivism consists in the realist notion of politics. Realism understands politics as an eternal struggle for power that underlies all social life, while war is the most intense manifestation of this struggle. Thus, the possibility of war cannot be eradicated. The article shows the normative aspects of such understanding of war. Realism, unlike pacifism or just war theory, is less enthusiastic about ethical or legal regulation of war; furthermore, it shows the dangers that may be caused by political moralism and “criminalization” of war. On the other hand, realism fails to provide a set of norms or principles that would surpass the just war principles. The realist principles of national interest and prudence are as vague, unclear and prone to misuse as classic just war principles are. Author draws a conclusion that to be able to create a valid set of principles of war, realism needs to further converge with international relations theory schools and “enlarge” the set of its base theoretical notions.

2019 was the second hottest year on record, with enhanced ice melts, sea level rises, heatwaves, droughts, and unprecedented large-scale wildfires of record intensity. Here I chart a new research a...

Peace operations are a highly resilient international institution for managing armed conflict. Their resilience derives from what constructivists in International Relations theory call collective i...

Australian foreign policy makers increasingly place an emphasis on the importance of rules and norms. These foreign policy statements reflect concerns about China's growing assertiveness combined with the belief that a ‘thick’ anarchy is safer for middle powers. Yet while Australia has been fixated with how China poses a threat to the international order, at times, Australia has actively challenged that order itself. Such was the case when the Prime Minister gave an address on ‘negative globalism’ at the Lowy Institute in October 2019. This article advances a theoretically grounded framework for understanding how these performative challenges arise and come to cause norm erosion. The framework draws together three elements: the rule or norm in question; representational strategies; and domestic audiences. The article illustrates this framework using the example of the Prime Minister's Lowy Institute address.

Realism, constructivism, and liberal institutionalism share the assumption that states are rational and self-maximizing actors. While these theories disagree as to whether states prioritize military power or economic wealth, they converge around the notion that states pursue these goods rationally and predictably. Complaints against and threats of defection from prominent international security and trade regimes, including NATO and the EU, raise doubts about states’ rationality and predictability. Perhaps these theories’ shared assumption about rational action has become an impediment to understanding state behavior and institutional cooperation. To enrich and to expand the conversation within international political theory, my article turns to Rousseau’s international political thought. Rousseau anticipates central arguments in each of the major traditions of IR theory but locates political self-interest in the sub-rational passion amour propre rather than in reason itself. Rousseau exemplifies a more nuanced way to understand the irrational roots of political motivation and the limits of international order. My paper traces the international implications of amour propre through Rousseau’s key texts on international politics and turns to his “Letter to Philopolis” as a way to re-frame Rousseau’s account of political responsibility.

This article demonstrates how Netflix, the current leading SVOD provider, can be a plat­form of global cultural exchange, which not only provides entertainment, but also offers a critical reflection on international affairs to its subscribers. Despite the fact that most Netflix content is fic­tional, its distributed and produced films and TV series still portray various theoretical approaches of international relations. This claim is based on the premises of critical discourse, which see our reality in terms of the social context.The aim of the article is to reveal what principles of main international relations theories (name­ly realism, liberalism, feminism, constructivism, or other critical theories) can Netflix subscribers find in the selected TV series. Using a visual qualitative analysis as a research method, the authors study five TV series, specifically Traitors (UK), 1983 (PL), Nobel (NOR), Pine Gap (AU) and Homeland (US). These TV series were selected with regard to their diverse origins of production, the topic’s central focus being politics, security or international relations, and their high ratings and numbers of viewers.The analysis of each TV series is based on answering three questions, which are used in defining basic premises of the portrayed theories. The following questions are: What role does the state play as an actor in the international system? What is the dominant cultural identity of the society? What is the status of an individual in a country? Processes of forming opinions and building images of social reality are influenced by the context in which the individual acts. As such, cultural exchange can influence the evolution of contemporary media society and thus affect viewers who are indirectly led to critical reflection. The results indicate that the global cultural exchange through the medium of mass entertainment is still driven mainly by traditional theoretical premises.

This article presents a theoretical approach towards the global political steps of non-state actors. Particular attention is given to a number of theories of international relations, such as neorealism, international liberalism, and constructivism, which are able to encompass current global actions of non-state political actors. For a clearer perspective on the subject matter, the article employs the example of Iraqi Kurdistan (KRI); as a non-state actor, KRI has recently become a vivid example for the theories of international relations. The conclusion is made that security, economy, culture, religion and identity are the key and post powerful instruments of non-state actors of international politics. The example of KRI demonstrates that international relations of non-state actors focus on security, economy and culture, as well as serve as the instruments of interaction with both, state and non-state actors. The article reviews such activity within the framework of neorealism, international liberalism, and constructivism. It is underlines that the example of Iraqi Kurdistan (KRI) fully meets all the criteria of a non-state actor of international politics. It is also a brilliant example for the theories of international relations.

The article analyzes the social transformations that have taken place in societies at the turn of the XXI century. These transformations are largely due to formation of radical inequality which is known now both in practice and theory as “1% economy”.The article demonstrates that adequate understanding of this new type of social inequality is possible only under the condition of change in methodological approach. Contstructivist approach should be given up in favour of structuralist approach. The structuralist approach makes it possible to view the new social inequality as an objective social process as the social structure of a new type of society. This social structure and social order determine social chances and life conditions of individuals.New radical social inequality gives rise to a new type of contemporary society. The bipolar society replaces the mass middle class society of the second half of the XX century. The bipolar society may be graphically presented as a pyramid with a truncated top and a broad social bottom.The article shows the processes and mechanisms that are forming this broad social bottom. This makes it possible to conceptualize the new social lower class as an axial central component in the structure of contemporary bipolar societies. In this function it has replaced the middle class.

Michael Zürn's A Theory of Global Governance is a major theoretical statement. The first section of this essay summarizes Zürn's argument, pointing out that his Global Politics Paradigm views contestation as generated endogenously from the dilemmas and contradictions of reflexive authority relationships. Authoritative international institutions, he maintains, have difficulty maintaining their legitimacy in a world suffused with democratic values. The second section systematically compares Zürn's Global Politics Paradigm with both Realism and Cooperation Theory, arguing that the three paradigms have different scope conditions and are therefore as much complementary as competitive. The third section questions the relevance of Zürn's argument to contemporary reality. Great power conflict and authoritarian populism in formerly democratic countries generate existential threats to multilateralism and global institutions that are more serious than Zürn's legitimacy deficits.

International Relations scholars are certain about two facts: power is the defining concept of the discipline and there is no consensus about what that concept means. One explanation for this problematic state of the field is that most International Relations scholars freight their analyses of power with hidden assumptions about time. Temporality is an essential component of political analysis, as a burgeoning literature has begun to explore. This paper argues that there are two latent presumptions about time that fundamentally affect how scholars conceptualize power in world politics. First, scholars are rarely explicit in defining the temporal scope of their key causal processes. The longer the implicit temporal scope, the more expansive their definition and operationalization of power can be. Second, there is considerable variation of beliefs about the temporal returns to power: does exercising or accumulating power generate positive or negative feedback effects over time? Relying on canonical works in the field, this paper examines the hidden assumptions that different paradigms make about power and time. Illuminating these assumptions clarifies the root of cross-paradigmatic disagreements about international politics and suggests some interesting pathways for future theoretical and empirical work.

This article revisits the relationship between law and international order. Building on legal research concerned with transnational law, we argue that domestic courts are endogenous sites of international political change. National courts are constitutive of international order by generating new rules, adjudicating transnational disputes, and bounding state sovereignty. We illustrate the ways in which national courts create new political opportunities by updating three core international relations theory debates. Recognizing the role of domestic courts as global adjudicators enhances our understanding of regime complexity and international forum shopping. By re-interpreting aspects of conventional international law, and engaging in cross-border dialogue, domestic courts challenge our understanding of international diffusion and judicialization. By redefining the boundaries of state authority and sovereignty, national courts create potential for conflict and cooperation. A transnational law perspective illustrates the porous nature between domestic and international spheres, highlighting how domestic courts have become adjudicators for state and non-state actors that operate across mainstream levels of analysis. Our approach calls on scholars to move beyond analyzing national legal systems as mechanisms of compliance to instead consider domestic courts as co-creators of international order.

The merger and enlargement of French regions implemented from 2015 is part of a regionalization process which began in the 1950s. A constructivist approach of the emergence and strengthening of thi...

How do formal international institutions change and adjust to new circumstances? The conventional wisdom in international relations, outlined by rational design, is that the answer lies in designed flexibility, which allows states to adjust agreements. Drawing on rich but disparate literatures across subfields of political science—especially constructivism and historical institutionalism—we propose an alternative, which we call “emergent flexibility.” Emergent flexibility is a property of international institutions that is not intentionally crafted by rule-makers when a rule is formally established, but is subsequently discovered, activated, and accessed by creative rule-users in ways unintended by designers. Rich case studies trace how rule-users have accessed emergent flexibility through the legal interpretive strategy of subsequent practice to change rigid rules of the UN Charter and the European Convention on Human Rights. A key implication of emergent flexibility is that, contrary to rational design expectations, international institutions designed to be rigid can adjust to unforeseen circumstances even in the absence of formal redesign, allowing cooperation to continue. The broadening of flexibility from designed to emergent reveals the politics of flexibility between formal design moments, provides a more nuanced notion of intentionality, and equips us to better address fundamental positive and normative questions of institutional development.

327 316.42:316.32 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37458/ssj.1.1.7 Review Paper The traditional theory of international relations, whether it is realism, liberalism, constructivism, or scientific behaviorism, define sovereign states as a unified body in international arena. It has consistent interests, and naturally also has consistent foreign policy goals and means. In the 20th century, and especially during the two World Wars and the Cold War, this conceptual abstraction was very accurate. But after the end of the Cold War, especially in the 21st century, this concept gradually went against the reality of international relations. On the one hand, the comprehensive strength of a country cannot directly transform competitive advantages in specific areas; on the other hand, the main resistance of many countries, including superpowers, may not be another power, but different domestic interest groups as well as international non state actors. This has caused traditional international relations theories, from hypotheses to conceptual and inferential levels, to be unable to explain the world today.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child entered into force in 1990. It condemns child marriage, violence and discrimination against children and enjoins tutelage for their educatio...

The recent rise of populism has threatened to undermine the stability of international economic integration. Using the case of Britain's 2016 vote to leave the European Union, we challenge prevaili...

For several decades the European Union was recognised as a major Russian partner, as cooperation with the EU had important political and economic effects on Russia. While these relations were based on common interests in such areas as energy, trade and cross-border cooperation, they also faced serious difficulties because of their different interpretation of values. A traditional explanation of Russia’s attitude to the European Union was based on the theoretical assumptions of the rationalist approach. Neorealists tend to concentrate on the conflicts between the EU and Russia and describe it as a result of their struggle for spheres of influence over their common neighbourhood. In contrast, Neoliberals focused on EU-Russia cooperation and explained it as a problem- solving mechanism based on common interests and the necessity to solve common problems. While the rationalist approach fails to explain transformation of Russia’s perception of the EU, constructivists demonstrate their capacity to explain the evolution of relations between the EU and Russia and the changes of Russia’s policy towards the EU. This article studies the evolution of Russia’s perception of the European Union within the context of EU-Russia relations and their possible theoretical interpretations. In order to examine Russia’s perception of the EU, a constructivist theoretical framework is used with a special focus on imitation and social learning. The imitation process is illustrated by Russia’s implementation of democratic norms and practices; the social learning concepts are used to evaluate political ideas used by Russia to show its vision of the EU and relations with the EU

This article adds to the intersubjective research into policy failures by analysing the furore that erupted in UK politics over the sinking in May 1982 of the Argentine cruiser General Belgrano during the Falklands War. The article examines the ways in which the Thatcher government initially tried to conceal what had really happened and how, over time, the revelations piled up and the sinking came to be narrated as a serious case of government wrongdoing. To interpret the challenges interested parties in politics and the media faced in holding the government to account, the article develops a new analytical framework for making sense of the ways in which secrecy and acknowledgement interplay in the construction of failure narratives. It argues that elite control over information subtly shapes both the willingness and ability of interested parties to contest official government positions, resulting in a series of theoretical and policy facing conclusions.

The scientific article is devoted to the issue of interdependence in the energy sector between differentregions of the world in the example of EU-EAEU cooperation. The purpose of this study is to analyzethe role of the energy factor as a connecting and integrating element of regional economic interactionbetween the EU and the EAEU. Using the theoretical paradigms of realism, liberalism, constructivism, thearticle analyzes the relationship between the EU and the EAEU in the context of ensuring future stabilityin the energy sector in Europe related to the ability of the countries of the European Union (EU) and theEAEU to support the interdependence of the energy market. While writing the article, the author studiedand summarized the studies of scholars of the realism paradigm, whose writings discussed the influenceof economic interdependence on states' intentions to initiate conflicts, as well as neoliberal school followerslike R. Keohane and J. Nye who conceptualize interdependence and define it as the existenceof interdependence between international actors in various fields of their interaction. Based on the dataobtained, it was found that an analysis of energy relations between the EU and the EAEU in recent yearsconfirms the hypothesis that the political consequences of interdependence are not a simple function ofgrowing trade and investment relations. By analyzing the political impact of energy interdependence,one can focus not only on existing or planned pipelines, the development of market conditions, thestructure of energy prices, the dynamics of exports and imports, and the extent of interdependence.Key words: EU, EAEU, interdependence, energy interests, cooperation, international relations

The transnationalization and digitization of economic activity has undermined the quality of official economic statistics, which still center on national territories and material production. Why do we not witness more vigorous efforts to bring statistical standards in line with present-day economic realities, or admissions that precision in economic data has become increasingly illusive? The paradoxical answer, we argue, lies in the norms underpinning global statistical practice. Users expect statistics to draw on unambiguous sources, to allow for comparison over time and across countries, and they prize coherence—both internally and with holistic macroeconomic models. Yet as we show, the ambition of the transnational statistical community to meet these norms has in fact undermined the ability of economic data to represent economic life more faithfully. We base our findings on interviews with two dozen leading statisticians at international economic organizations, archival research at the International Monetary Fund and a thorough review of debates among statistical experts.

El desarrollo de las relaciones internacionales (rrii) es relativamente reciente en compa­ración con otras disciplinas de las ciencias sociales. Si bien ha existido un gran avance en cuanto a debates teóricos y metodológicos siguen pendientes varias preguntas que emer­gieron después de su incorporación como dis­ciplina científica pos segunda guerra mundial. En este texto se discuten brevemente algunos de sus principales hitos: la idea de sociedad in­ternacional con la consecuente ampliación del nivel y unidades de análisis más allá del Estado. También la inclusión de enfoques de econo­mía política internacional (epi) y el construc­tivismo que, desafían por un lado la estricta separación de lo doméstico-internacional y, por el otro, la absoluta objetividad. Del mis­mo modo, se estudian las particularidades y aportes desde América Latina en las relaciones internacionales. En esta línea, se argumenta la relevancia de representar la diversidad de paradigmas y sociedades más allá de Estados Unidos y Europa. The development of international relations (ir) is relatively recent compared to other dis­ciplines of the social sciences. Although there has been an advance in terms of theoretical and methodological debates, after its incor­poration as a scientific discipline post Second World War, several questions remain. In this text some of its main milestones are briefly discussed: the idea of an international society with the consequent expansion of the level and units of analysis beyond the State. Also the in­clusion of approaches to international political economy (epi) and constructivism that, on the one hand, challenge the strict separation of the domestic-international, and, on the other, the absolute objectivity. In the same way, the particularities and contributions from Latin America to the discipline are highlighted. In this sense, the relevance of representing the diversity of paradigms and societies outside the United States and Europe is argued.

This article explores the role of tradition in the social world and offers a theory of why some traditions ‘stick’. Building on the ontological insight of ‘as if realism’, I argue that traditions are constitutive both of an actor’s beliefs and of their institutional context, and so critical to political analysis. The relative resonance of traditions can be understood as contingent upon power relations and ideational maintenance of traditions by groups of upholders – what could be termed ‘socially contingent’. Traditions help us understand why a person believes what they believe and how a person’s strategic calculations are affected by perceptions of what others believe. They exert a powerful pull to political actors as orientation tools in complex social settings and through the symbols and argumentation attached by those who uphold them. While traditions are contingent upon people’s beliefs, it is ‘as if’ they have a life of their own.

El presente trabajo analiza los distintos intereses que guiaron las políticas exteriores del Reino de Arabia Saudita y de la República Islámica de Irán en la guerra civil de Yemen desde 2014 hasta 2017. Para ello, se abordará a través de una síntesis teórica dual (realista y constructivista) cuáles han sido los intereses que guiaron las acciones externas de los actores involucrados. This paper analyzes the different interests that guided the foreign policy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran at Yemens civil war from 2014 to 2017. For that aim, it will be addressed through a dual theoretical synthesis (realism and constructivism) which were the interests that guided the external actions of the actors involved. Fil: Dip Gilardone, Agustín. Universidad Nacional de Rosario; Argentina

Responsibility to Protect (R2P) brought about new challenges for research on norms in International Relations, mainly due to the actions of emerging powers. These states have exhibited complex behaviour towards norms. Rather than classifying them as simple norm-rejecters or norm-takers, current literature on norms in International Relations has classified them as norm-shapers. In their behaviour, emerging powers seek to shape the norm from various angles. In this sense, the need arises to theoretically frame these types of engagement. This essay aims to analyse the action of normative shapers through the lens of the English School of International Relations, combined with constructivism. After presenting the norm-shapers and characterising them theoretically, a new concept is introduced, called pluralist norm-shapers. Resumo O R2P trouxe novos desafios para a pesquisa de normas nas Relações Internacionais, principalmente devido às ações das potências emergentes. Esses estados tiveram um comportamento complexo em relação à norma. Em vez de classificá-los como simples rejeitadores ou tomadores de normas, a literatura atual sobre normas em Relações Internacionais os classificou como formadores de normas. Em seu comportamento, as potências emergentes procurariam moldar a norma sob vários ângulos. Nesse sentido, surge a necessidade de enquadrar teoricamente esses tipos de engajamento. Este ensaio tem como objetivo analisar a ação de modeladores normativos através das lentes da Escola de Inglês de Relações Internacionais, combinada com o construtivismo. Depois de apresentar os modeladores de normas e caracterizá-los teoricamente, é introduzido um novo conceito, chamado modelador de normas pluralista.

Savaş, anarşizm, kaos adına ne denirse densin ulusal ve uluslararası düzensizliğe, kuralsızlığa, umutsuzluğa ve mutsuzluğa sebep olur. Böylesi bir duruma son vermek için ulusal veya uluslararası bir takım sözleşmeler, anlaşmalar ve düzenlemeler yapılır. Tıpkı Modern dönem toplumsal sözleşmecilerden olan Machiavelli, Rousseau ve Locke gibi düşünürlerin ulusal düzeyde kargaşayı nihayete erdirmek üzere önerdikleri toplumsal düzen gibidir. Burada dikkate alınması gereken husus; düşünürlerin, düzenin sağlanması için sözleşmeye toplumun ekseriyetinin katılımı noktasında ortak bir argüman geliştirmiş olmalarıdır. İşte uluslararası düzeyde gerçekleştirilmesi düşünülen örgütlerin de, tüm aktörlerin veyahut ekseriyetinin katılımının sağlandığı, ortak çıkarlar ve değerler üzerine kurulan heterojen bir toplumsal yapı arz etmesi beklenir. Tam bu noktada uluslararası bir örgüt olarak Milletler Cemiyeti’nin ve Birleşmiş Milletler’in mütecanis bir yapıya düşmeden uluslararası bir toplum olarak değerlendirilip değerlendirilemeyeceği önem kazanmaktadır. Bu gerekçeyle Birinci Dünya Savaşından sonra barışın ve nizamın tesisini sağlayacak bir sistem olarak kurulmuş olan Milletler Cemiyeti’nin ve İkinci Dünya Savaşı sonrasında dünyada güveni ve barışı tesis etmek için büyük devletler öncülüğünde kurulmuş olan Birleşmiş Milletler’in uluslararası bir toplum olup olmadığı tartışması çalışmamızın amacını oluşturmuştur. Bu perspektifle ilk olarak, Millet Cemiyeti’nin ve Birleşmiş Milletler’in kuruluş sürecine değinilmiştir. İkinci olarak, İngiliz Okulu ve inşacılık teorisi irdelenmiştir. Son olarak ise, İngiliz Okulu üzerinden Millet Cemiyeti ve İnşacılık teorisinin anahtar kavramları ile de Birleşmiş Milletler, uluslararası toplum bağlamında tartışılmaya çalışılmıştır. Çalışmada tarihsel sosyoloji, içerik analizi ve karşılaştırmalı analiz olarak birden fazla yöntem kullanılmıştır.

It has been widely noted that China and Russia have grown progressively closer over the last two decades. Although the scholarly literature has offered detailed descriptions and various ad hoc explanations of this trend, the Sino-Russian bilateral relationship has been the subject of very little scrutiny using rigorous theory, which has obstructed hypothesis formation and evaluation. Moreover, the cooperative post-Cold War trend in the bilateral relationship seems puzzling for baseline versions of each of the major paradigms of international relations theory: realism, constructivism and liberalism. For realists, China’s rising power, coupled with its geographic proximity and longstanding border disputes with Russia, made it a present and growing threat to Russian security at the end of the Cold War. Why did China’s rise not incur balancing from Russia and increasing bilateral hostility, rather than reconciliation? For constructivists, the stark differences in political ideologies and national cultures, as well as a long history of antagonism, presaged continued post-Cold War animosity. How have these historical animosities and ideological rifts been mitigated or overcome? Finally, both countries were increasingly integrated into the US-led international order immediately following the Cold War, with relatively low interdependence in their bilateral relationship. From a liberal perspective, why did this not prompt the two countries to improve political relations with the West while holding each other at arm’s length? The papers in this special issue develop and apply nuanced theoretical arguments to derive testable hypotheses for the cooperative trend in China–Russia relations. In contrast to existing scholarship, these papers offer generalizable insights that both improve our understanding of a crucially important contemporary case, while also advancing IR theory in substantial ways.

Macroeconomic statistics simultaneously shape and try to capture the political economy we study. Their biases mold social and political dynamics; they also infect academic and policy analysis. Political economy can both benefit from and advance an understanding of economic statistics as political artefacts. To help unlock that potential, this article builds on scholarship dispersed across disciplines and highlights three points. First, a binary debate that either acclaims or vilifies economic data is misdirected. Indispensable for public policy, quantification is neither good nor bad per se; the question is what its specific ramifications are. Second, macroeconomic statistics have been built around an ideal of white male factory work for wages. The further economic activity is removed from that image, the more statistics misrepresent or ignore it, with systematic biases as a result. Third, the real-world impact of statistics always depends on how they are understood, used, and subverted. It hinges on statistical practices, not just on abstract measurement approaches. As political economists we are political agents when we define, and reproduce, our object of study. We face both an analytical and a normative imperative to work with and towards statistics that do justice to the world and the people in it.

Why countries establish military alliance? What functions fulfill such security institutions? Are alliances designated to deal with external threats only or could they play additional roles? Which variables influence a military cooperation pattern adopted by allies? How do domestic politics, domestic political regime affect countries preferences regarding the cooperation pattern in military alliance? There are several theoretical approaches, which strive to address these questions. We start the discussion with the review of the existing literature referring to the main theoretical approaches in the field of international relations to the study of military cooperation and alliances: neorealism, constructivism, liberal/democratic peace theory and rational choice theory of institutionalism. As part of the discussion, for the purpose of examination of the cooperation pattern of the post-Soviet Eurasian military alliance, we present our theoretic framework based on the rational choice approach.

This chapter argues that the nature of Brazilian “power” in the global system is either neglected or misunderstood, even as its presence as a rising power increasingly attracts greater attention from scholars and analysts. To better capture how Brazil sits in the international power hierarchy, we subject it to a threefold theoretical analysis derived from the main IR research traditions—Realism (awkward capabilities), Liberalism (awkward behaviour), and Constructivism (awkward identity). We conclude that Brazil may be categorized as a type of “awkward great power”—one that occupies a liminal and transitional status in the international hierarchy of states due to its impressive but uneven capabilities and its ultimate political determination to acquire a seat at the top tables of international politics.

This chapter surveys how some of the main international relations theories can assist in understanding national security problems. First it identifies the landscape in which national security policymaking takes place, where conventional cleavages between policy arenas—like foreign policy and domestic policy—are increasingly breaking down due to factors relating to globalisation. Second, it then explores specific theories and the ways that they explain, prescribe and even try to predict outcomes. In doing so it focuses on three main approaches to international relations: realism, liberalism and constructivism. Third, the chapter applies these theoretical approaches to three national security problems in order to demonstrate how their core assumptions can produce radically different interpretations and solutions. The chapter concludes with some potential lessons for national security policy planners about how theory might be usefully employed.

Purpose This paper aims to examine the hypotheses of main international theories (realism, liberalism and constructivism) and the development of these theories toward the behavior of foreign policy of small states in the developing world. The theories of international relations, especially the realistic theory, face a theoretical debate and a fundamental criticism. The hypotheses of these theories are not able to explain the external behavior of some small states, especially those in the developing world such as Qatar. In particular, these small states do not have the elements of physical power through which they can play this role. However, they are based on the internal determinants (such as political leadership and the variable of perception) and non-physical dimensions of power to play an effective and influential external role. Design/methodology/approach This topic sheds light on the hypotheses of theories of main international relations, which explain the behavior of foreign policy of small states. This is due to the increased number of such states after the disintegration of Soviet Union, the practice of some countries an effective foreign role and the transformation of the concept of power from the hard power to soft power, and then to smart power Findings The theories of international relations, especially the realistic theory, face a theoretical debate and a fundamental criticism. The hypotheses of these theories are not able to explain the external behavior of some small states, especially those in the developing world such as Qatar. In particular, these small states do not have the elements of physical power through which they can play this role. However, they are based on the internal determinants (such as political leadership and the variable of perception) and non-physical dimensions of power to play an effective and influential external role. Originality/value The importance of the study comes from its interest in small countries in general and the Qatar situation in particular. The small country emerged as a player independent of the Gulf Cooperation Council, unlike what prevailed before, which led to the discussion of a regional role for Qatar despite its small power compared to the strength and size of other factions in the region such as Turkey, Israel and Iran.

I draw on W.E.B. Du Bois’s political thought to challenge de Shalit’s characterization of the role of the philosopher and the public in political theory. I press three issues to clarify what it wou...

This article attempts to understand the source of the reunification process in the Korean Peninsula. This is descriptive qualitative research using secondary data and utilizes a constructivism approach that offers norms and identity as the source of international relations. In addition, this article also using realism theory since the two countries often using hard strategies. In this preliminary studies found that the failure of Korean reunification is due to the difference of interest combined with the complexity of political identity between the two countries. Therefore, this is an important topic to examine at least to understand the construction of identity during the reunification process.

Systems Approach came to prominence in International Relations studies during the second half of the last century. However, now, any traditional perspective of the interstate system of International Relations has become obsolete. In this article, the organizational science (tectology) of Alexander Bogdanov is presented from the perspective of its sui generis systems research methodology, which, when first published, was vastly ahead of its time. The current virtue of Bogdanov’s tectology lies in the epistemological influence the principles he formulated have on the organization of systems complexes (such as conjugation, ingression and disingression), common for any objects. Detecting the dialectics of national and global processes remains an ongoing problem in international studies. Bogdanov’s scientific heritage seems relevant for approaching this problem now. In this article, the roots of his system-based vision and special aspects of these systems theories are analysed, allowing an all-important niche for Bogdanov’s science of organizations in such a context to be carved. As an example of relationism, tectology is juxtaposed with substantialism, and such International Relations theories are aligned with substantialism as structural realism, neoliberal institutionalism and sociological constructivism. Ontology and phenomenologism are considered in depth as characteristics of Bogdanov’s empiriomonistic theory; however, it is acknowledged that Cartesianism is more typical for key International Relations theories, as this can explain rationalism and dualism, matching principles of nature with rules of traditional mechanics. This article pays particular attention to Bogdanov’s notion of bi-regulation in multicomponent complexes, which have no use for external governance (as they are self-regulated). This notion might be helpful when trying to specify the pivotal role a territorial state might play despite the strengthening or weakening of power which institutions of multilevel global governance perennially undergo. The article is focused on Bogdanov’s methodology, which regards any human activity as a totality of collective experience, with the most significant aspect being social culture. When taking territorial aspects of contemporary global policy and its transnational features together, with the help of his system-tectological conception, we shall predominantly see features including “normal” conjunctions of organizational forms, which are undergoing constant processes of conjunction/disjunction, devoid of any unnecessary elements of high-stakes drama.

The objective of this article is to explain how the United States took advantage of the Sino-Soviet divergences to approach Beijing not only within order to contain Moscow in Central Asia, but also to incorporate China into an international norm to open it to free trade and democratize it in an order that favored it. However, although in the international normativity that the United States guided, it was successful in the Soviet containment and the Chinese opening to trade, it failed to democratize in Beijing. Also, while the current US international order has benefited China in the economic field, now Washington faces the risk that the magnitude of Beijing’s interests will be aimed to promote a new international norm. The analysis is carried out based on the Constructivism of International Relations, focused on the norms and identities that emphasize the values of the dominant countries.

Martha Finnemore has visited MGIMO-University this September, she gave several public lectures for students and participated in a number of roundtables. Professor Finnemore was very kind to give an interview to our journal on various issues of international information and cybersecurity. The interview was conducted by Elena Zinovieva, vice director of the Center for International Information Security, Science and Technology Policy at MGIMO-University.