Nationalising International Theory: Race,Class and the English School

Much work has been done to deconstruct the links between knowledge and power in IR as "an American Social Science". This topic has arisen again with the re- launching of the English School of IR Theory in 2001. This essay argues that although the English School is critical of the power-knowledge dynamic, it actually exacerbates the problem by deliberately "nationalising" international theory. The essay traces the emergence and logic of the English School and its key concept "International Society". It argues that the English School is tied not only to national identity but to the rules of European Empire. Using the case of International Society's intervention in China, the essay shows how International Society uses "standards of civilisation" to draw borders between the subjects and objects of IR. But rather than tracing civilisation/empire to racial/national differentiation, the essay argues that "class" is used to differentiate between aristocratic member states of the club of International Society, and lower class colonies outside Europe. In other words, rather than looking to international ethics to regulate world politics, International Society relies on aristocratic etiquette for world ordering. Hence the theory is not as radical as its promoters suggest; rather, by limiting theoretical discussion to nation-states, the English School is a conservative confederate of other state-centric approaches to world politics. To do this, the essay looks beyond Eurocentric discourse and high diplomacy; it engages in a comparative IR theory that uses a new set of texts from China and the popular culture of manners.     

The Highs and Lows of Teaching IR Theory: Using Popular Films for Theoretical Critique

This article introduces an approach to IR that uses popular films to teach students how to critically analyze IR theory. By pairing IR traditions (like Realism) and the slogans that go with them (like "international anarchy is the permissive cause of war") with popular films (like Lord of the Flies ), this approach poses questions not about the truth or falsity of IR theories but about how IR theories appear to be true. This technique works because it draws upon visual analytical skills that students already possess and transfers them to analyses of IR theory and international politics. Overall, it challenges the positioning of IR theory as beyond culture and politics rather than as part and parcel of it, transforms what we think of as doing critical IR theory, and repositions students from passive recipients of IR truths into critically active and engaged analysts of IR theory's commonsense views of the world.     

Lessons from the Past: Reassessing the Interwar Disciplinary History of International Relations

This article reconstructs the interwar discourse of international relations among American political scientists and seeks to challenge the orthodox view that the scholarship of this period was essentially idealist in nature. It aims to make a contribution to the growing body of literature devoted to examining the institutional history of international relations. My purpose is to demonstrate that the conventional label of idealism that has been attached to the interwar period of international relations scholarship seriously misrepresents the actual character of the conversation that was being directed toward understanding international politics. By carefully reconstructing the internal discourse of the field, many of the field's long forgotten individuals and ideas are brought back to life. The article concludes by highlighting some of the lessons that the interwar discourse offers to the study of international relations today and argues that this period cannot be construed as idealist.     

The international law commission of the United Nations: Legal vacuum or microcosm of world politics?

Classical realists and Utopian idealists have long disagreed over the nature of international law. While classical realists from E.H. Carr to Hans Morgenthau contend that law is the product of power realities in international relations, Utopian idealists reject such power explanations, focusing instead on the institutions that create international law. This study addresses that theoretic struggle by empirically examining the intervention of world politics in the debate process of the International Law Commission. A data base is created from the debate record of Law Commission members from 1983 to 1989. Content analysis is performed to test explicit hypotheses that examine the Utopian assumption of an apolitical Law Commission found in the Commission's Statute. The findings indicate that the Law Commission functions in a manner that is greatly constrained by global politics and power realities. The focus on institutions, prevalent in the literature, is misleading and fails to capture the essence of the debate process in the Commission. The strength of the findings underscores the necessity for students of international law to employ a more empirical, systematic methodology in their research.     

Global Cities,International Relations and the Fabrication of the World

The global city presents one available model for understanding urbanisation and associated hierarchies of power. In International Relations (IR), the global city is treated as a unit in a new type of international system, an increasingly important actor in world politics, or a site through which global processes operate. This article forwards an alternative perspective. It treats the global city as a dispositif of power. While the global city captures the fact that power and wealth are spatially concentrated in today’s urbanising world politics, the concept also has a world-making capacity. The article analyses this capacity in two contexts. Firstly, it presents a genealogy of the voyage of the global cities concept from critical academic scholarship to a buzzword of city elites and business consultants. Secondly, it performs a governmental analysis of global city reports and indexes. Finally, the article suggests that conceptualising the global city as a dispositif enables the important task of imagining alternative ways of framing the meaning of urbanisation in world politics.     

Domestic Costs, the U.S. Public, and the Isolationist Calculus

This article examines and tests two models of the circumstances shaping the extent of the American public&;apos;s isolationist sentiment. The first, termed the "elastic band" model, assumes a constant popular disinclination toward foreign involvements, one that may, at most, temporarily be stretched to accommodate responses to major external threats. A second model assumes the operation of a "cognitive shortcut" based on low-information rationality. It proposes that acceptable levels of domestic involvement depend on the gravity of the domestic opportunity costs of foreign involvement, and it is termed the "domestic costs" model. While the former model implies a constant public resistance to international activism, a resistance that is relaxed only in proportion to the gravity of external threats, the latter model suggests that the U.S. public displays a relatively constant internationalist attitude, and that variations around that threat are largely explained by fluctuations in the perceived domestic opportunity costs of international involvement.
Both models are subjected to statistical testing, a testing that vindicates the domestic costs model. Further insights are obtained by examining attitudes toward internationalism as they are affected by levels of education. Although internationalism increases with education, and although levels of education predict differential impacts of the variables encompassed by the model, each segment of the public seems to operate within the general parameters of the "domestic costs" model.     

Normative Concepts of Global Distributive Justice and the State of International Relations Theory

The terrorist attacks in September 2001 on the world's most affluent country have highlighted the need to address the increasing disparity between the wealth of different nations. Rather than seeing global distributive justice as a concept non-conducive to their national interest, the affluent states might begin to accept it as an integral part of it, as one of evidently many means to prevent the proliferation of political extremism. This article analyses the role that international relations (IR) theory in its current state can play in this process. Since IR theories purport to explain, and possibly predict, behaviour in settings in which states face problems for which solutions beyond states are required and since global distributive justice is one such problem, it should be reasonable to expect that IR theories provide some answers to these questions. To that end the article critically assesses the major scholarly trends in the field for their ability to accommodate two recently developed normative proposals on global distributive justice put forward by Thomas Pogge and Hillel Steiner. IR theory is found to be inadequate to fulfil the demands usually directed at a theory, in that it fails, firstly, to appreciate the significance of norms in international politics and, secondly, to prescribe and recommend alternatives to policy makers.     

Across the Great Divide: Integrating Comparative and International Politics

Research in comparative and international politics often deals with the same questions, such as the nature of war, the conduct of foreign economic policy, and the consequences of different political institutions. Yet there is a pronounced gap between these two subfields of political science. In neorealist theory, this gap is to be expected, since the structure of the international system cannot be reduced to facts about its component units. Given the incompleteness of international relations theory, it rarely provides knowledge that is sufficient to explain the actions of the component units. This theoretical insufficiency provides the motivation to bring theories of domestic and international politics closer together. Three attempts to integrate comparative and international politics are discussed in this article. The first derives from the logic of two-level games as originally advanced by Robert Putnam. The second relies on a special application of second-image reversed theory by Ronald Rogowski in Commerce and Coalitions. The third examines the merging of previously distinctive systems of rules and laws among countries in the European Union. This approach does not rely on a single exemplar (as do the first two) but uses a number of institutional and legal theories to conceptualize the domestification of a regional, international political system. Thus, strategic interaction, the domestic effects of international trade flows, and institutional merging of legal systems provide three quite different metaphors for narrowing the gap between our knowledge of domestic and of international politics.     

Why moral commitments matter: mapping the ethics and politics of responsible and accountable global governance

Much of the scholarly attention on commitments in international relations (IR) has remained narrowly framed, focusing on how states and other actors make strictly strategic calculations to comply with international norms and/or treaties. The trouble with this rationalist approach is that it oversimplifies the moral basis of commitments. This article offers a deeper analysis of this moral basis as well as the positive ethical values that help to direct and shape the content of the moral commitments of agents in IR. The article argues that the ethical values of sincerity, empathy and sacrifice play a dynamic yet under-studied meta-level role in helping one to interpret and explain the transformative dimensions of moral commitments in IR. The article first develops a meta-level theoretical approach to commitment in international theory and then applies this approach to two particular emergent discourses in international politics: the responsibility to protect and moral criminal accountability.     

Colonialism and imperialism in the quest for a universalist Korean-style international relations theory

This article aims to conduct a critical appraisal of two major discourses in South Korea on how to construct its national school of international relations (IR) in the global academic field. This article argues that South Korean IR academia's recent quest for an independent, self-reliant national school of IR with universal applicability still appears to be operating under a colonial mentality, either treating Korea as a mere test bed for mainstream rationalist IR approaches or mimicking the character of hegemonic IR theory, thereby reaffirming it. The normative consequences of seeking to promote a national rival to dominant theorizing provide an interesting case study on the sometimes hidden politics of IR scholarship.     

Max Weber,modernity and the project of international organization

In this essay I discuss programmatic proposals for international organization in the light of Max Weber's account of modernity. I argue that the authors known in international relations (IR) as ‘functionalists’ have pursued the extension of the modernization process that Weber analysed in national societies into the international sphere. Between 1900 and 1945, functionalists advocated a transformation of international politics, at that time still the domain of a lot of jingoism and aggression, into rational public administration. In the first part of the article I outline Weber's account of societal modernization with a focus on the sharp contrast between politics and bureaucratic administration. In the second section I engage with the writings of three political scientists who represent the early ‘functionalist’ tradition in IR: Paul Reinsch, James Arthur Salter and David Mitrany. I show how they planned to modernize IR by establishing a technocratic mode of governance and hence a Versachlichung der Gewaltherrschaft, that is, a depersonalization and rationalization of authority. The turn to international organizations in the early twentieth century thus can be seen in the context of the universal process of societal modernization as rationalization that Weber analysed.     

Toward a Global Theory of Mind: The Potential Benefits of Presenting a Range of IR Theories through Active Learning

Active learning is particularly well-suited to teaching across the range of perspectives inherent in the practice and study of international politics for two key reasons: (1) because of its capacity to highlight how subjective, intersubjective, and contested understandings play an important role in determining outcomes in the ivory tower as well as in the real world and (2) because of the compatibility between underlying theories of knowledge that inform active learning and the newer generation of IR theories including subaltern realism, social constructivism, constitutive theory, and postmodernism. This article explores the potential benefits of presenting these and other norm-oriented theories through active learning. It also discusses ways to overcome barriers to the integration of active learning techniques.     

Linkages and the promotion of democracy: the EU's eastern neighbourhood

The EU's eastern neighbourhood with its considerable divergence in regime types is a more challenging testing ground for democracy promotion than Central and Eastern Europe. This article explores the diversity of the international linkages in the eastern neighbours (Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan) and the role these linkages play in domestic politics. International linkages are filtered and activated by domestic politics. If diverse linkages reinforce domestic political competition, they can contribute to the creation of democratic openings. Conversely, in the absence of domestic political competition, international linkages can insulate a regime from internal pressures for reform, in particular if the linkages are deep and undiversified. This article focuses on one causal mechanism, namely stateness issues acting as a filter for international linkages.     

What Is Your Research Program? Some Feminist Answers to International Relations Methodological Questions

Methodological issues have constituted some of the deepest sources of misunderstanding between International Relations (IR) feminists and IR theorists working in social scientific frameworks. IR theorists have called upon feminists to frame their research questions in terms of testable hypotheses. Feminists have responded that their research questions cannot be answered using social science explanatory frameworks. Deep epistemological divisions about the construction and purpose of knowledge make bridging these methodological divides difficult. These epistemological standards lead feminists to very different methodological perspectives. Asking different questions from those typically asked in IR, many IR feminists have drawn on ethnographic, narrative, cross-cultural, and other methods that are rarely taught to students of IR, to answer them. Drawing on a range of interdisciplinary scholarship on feminist methodologies and some recent IR feminist case studies, this article analyzes and assesses how these methodological orientations are useful for understanding the gendering of international politics, the state and its security-seeking practices and its effects on the lives of women and men.     

Capability concentration,power transition,and war

Theories of international politics and war are generally formulated at the state, dyad, or system level of analysis. Systemic theories focus on structural attributes of the international system such as the distribution of capabilities. Alternatively, state‐level theories tend to emphasize national attributes, whereas dyadic theories concentrate on relational qualities between paired sets of states. This study presents an analysis of war at these analytic levels and explores the possibilities of synergistic empirical linkage. The results of a simple statistical experiment demonstrate that the two higher levels of aggregation are not separate and independent: The interaction of system and dyad‐level power dynamics is associated with patterns of international conflict, and the integration of shifting capability distributions at these levels produces a more adequate explanation of the sources of major power war.     

Back to the future of ‘one logic or two’?: forward to the past of ‘anarchy versus racist hierarchy’?

This article argues that while the attempt by Alex Callinicos to construct a non-reductionist approach for theorizing the international is brave, it falls short of the target due, in part, to the failure to look in the right place for a non-reductionist Marxism. In taking us ‘back to the future’ of the debate on ‘one logic or two?’ (‘economics’ or ‘geopolitics and economics’), the quest can at best result only in the construction of a thin materialist reductionism. This article develops an approach that takes norms and (racist) identity seriously—one that simultaneously reconfigures our conception of the international as a hierarchy rather than as a pure anarchy, thereby prompting a reconsideration of Callinicos's commitment to a neorealist anarchic conception of the international. This article closes by suggesting that the Eurocentrism of much Marxist International Relations scholarship obscures the role of non-Western resistance in the making of global politics.     

Looking Beyond the National Level: Foreign Direct Investment Attraction in U.S. States

International relations scholars need to look beyond the national level because U.S. states and governors are increasingly important actors in world politics. One way to look at their international activities is by examining the ways in which U.S. states seek to attract foreign direct investment (FDI), just one research puzzle at the nexus of international relations and U.S. state politics, two fields that rarely talk to one another. After pointing out the gaps within theories from international relations and international political economy, this paper describes the evolving global roles of both U.S. states and governors and shows how U.S. states attract FDI through the use of their international offices and governor-led overseas missions. Empirical findings indicate that U.S. states' international offices and a higher level of economic interdependence help states attract FDI, and the paper argues that extension of institutional approaches from IPE may be valuable for future research about the international capabilities of subnational governments and their leaders.     

Feminism and Constructivism: Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground?

The discipline of international relations (IR) is witnessing a "constructivist turn." In this article, we argue that the new preoccupation with constructivism provides a unique opportunity to further understanding between feminism and the IR mainstream. Feminism and constructivism share a commitment to an ontology of becoming that can serve as a common basis for conversation. Yet there are also profound differences between feminists and constructivists. First, most IR feminists approach gender and power as integral elements in processes of construction, whereas most constructivists consider power to be external to such processes. This failure to conceptualize power and gender as social and pervasive leads constructivists to miss an important part of the empirical reality of power politics. Second, constructivists tend to ignore the implications of a postpositivist epistemology, whereas for feminists the question of "Who knows?" is crucial. We argue that the constructivist failure to problematize the research process as a social (and therefore political) process of construction is logically inconsistent with an ontology of becoming. We introduce empirical materials to illustrate the advantages of feminist approaches. We hope to advance a dialogue between feminism and constructivism because the two approaches add to each other and in combination can yield better theoretical and empirical understandings of the world.     

浅论当代国家利益的国际性

本文阐述了国内外学者普遍认为国家利益具有国际性。在当代,国家利益的国际性越来越明显和突出,出现了国家利益国际化的趋向:各国国家利益越来越多地分布于海外,受国际环境的影响越来越大;同国际环境关联的国家安全利益内容和范围扩大,涉及经济、文化、信息、生态环境等方方面面。全球化尤其是世界经济一体化进程的加快发展和霸权的无孔不入是出现上述现象的两大原因。当代国家利益所具有的国际性及其国际化趋向,对国际社会和国际关系的发展产生了深远影响。