International Relations Studies in the USSR/Russia: Is there a Russian National School of IR Studies?

This article discusses the development of Soviet/Russian international relations (IR) studies starting from the end of Second World War until the present. It reveals that Soviet IR studies were based on a mixture of realism and Marxism–Leninism, with realism predominating. It was a very important feature of the Soviet understanding of IR, and it continues to have a strong influence even now on both the study and practice of IR. The author then analyses barriers to the formation of a national school in IR in the Soviet Union. The contemporary state of Russian IR studies is also discussed. The article demonstrates how political changes in the country led to a transformation of Russian IR studies (with the emergence of new IR institutions, new journals, and new universities in and outside Moscow). Influences on Russian IR studies from different national schools (American, British, and French) are also touched upon.     

After Postpositivism? The Promises of Critical Realism

This article argues that the current self-understanding of IR theory is misconceived and that it is time to move beyond the stagnant positivism/postpositivism debate. We argue that the attempt to occupy a middle ground compromise position between positivism and postpositivism is untenable because these two positions share much in common. In this sense a middle ground position between two problematic positions does not produce a less problematic position. What is needed is a metatheoretical analysis of the two extreme positions. We attempt to show how both positivism and postpositivism are embedded in a discourse of philosophical anti-realism. This anti-realism occurs as a result of what we call the post-Kantian-Humean 'problem-field' of international relations from which most contemporary positivist, constructivist, and post-structuralist IR approaches stem. We then try to overcome this 'problem-field' by means of radically reclaiming reality through a critical realist philosophy. Once outlined we try to show how this critical realist philosophy can help transcend some of the antinomies currently faced by IR scholars.     

Gestalt Ontology in International Relations: The Case of European Integration

This article proposes a new interdisciplinary perspective in international relations (IR). It suggests that contributions from perception studies can help us reconceptualize some elements of IR. Specifically, the article takes up the concept of Gestalt and applies it to European integration. The Gestalt laws and phenomena demonstrated by European integration can be identified in other examples of regional integration, as well as in various international organizations, or alliances. They also provide insight into other features of IR, such as the international order. The Gestalt approach per se may contribute to the development of a psychological constructivist theory of IR.     

United States Hegemony and Globalisation: What Role for Theories of Imperialism?

This article examines the return of the subject of imperialism to the social sciences since 2001, focusing in particular on Marxist and Marxist-related attempts to reconstruct an analysis of the US-led international order based on this concept. It does so by first examining attempts to update Marxist and Marxian work to understand contemporary globalisation, and then points to both the weaknesses of these approaches and international events that have undermined these theories. The paper then examines the return of imperialism in some detail. While the international order can still be described as imperialist, the article is sceptical of many accounts of the ‘new imperialism’. This is partly because the utility of classical theories was questionable in the pre-1914 era, and are even more so now. Theorising imperialism in turns of surplus capital or a spatial fix ignores the direction of capital flows, both before the First World War, and in the current era. Moreover, as Marxist and Marxian theories of globalisation point out, the current era is one of greater openness and international integration than the pre-1914 era, and there is far greater cooperation between the core capitalist states, as well as sovereign states in the developing world. Contemporary imperialism is characterised by US hegemony but also greater global interdependence, and US military domination does not guarantee its economic domination. At the same time however, US hegemony is closely related to neo-liberalism and, despite as much as because of US intentions, these same policies undermine the prospects for development in the ‘South’. In this respect, US attempts to ‘Americanise’ the world are undermined by US hegemony and the imperialism of free trade.     

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.     

Hearing Latin American Voices in International Relations Studies

This article offers a general account of international relations studies (IR) in Latin America through an examination of IR thinking in the region, an inventory of IR theory courses in seven Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Trinidad and Tobago), and an analysis of journal articles selected from five specialized IR journals in Latin America. Although considerable U.S. influence upon the ways in which IR is approached in Latin America is made apparent through this narrative, the specific context in which IR studies have evolved in the region has substantially altered the content of U.S. IR discourse. Therefore, the article concludes with a discussion of the possible contributions of Latin American IR to Anglo-American perspectives in the field.     

A New Perspective on ＂The German Ideology＂：The Cornerstone of Marxist International Studies

"The German Ideology" should be canonized as the cornerstone of Marxist international studies. In essence, "The German Ideology" is the masterpiece illuminating the basic theories of international studies at three levels-philosophically,historically and internationally.     

Staff and status in international bureaucracies: a Weberian perspective on the EU civil service

Recent studies in international relations (IR) have devoted little systematic attention to the personnel of international organizations. This article argues that the works of Max Weber could provide an orientation for future research on the cohesion and autonomy of the staff in international bureaucracies. In his writings, Weber highlights the role of bureaucratic officials as an “occupational status group” or Berufsstand distinguished by their professional ethics, privileged positions, practices of social closure and a particular style of life, which is expressed in a claim to social prestige. Weber suggests a sociological analysis of bureaucratic staff, whose group character is determined by their occupation and profession. The article outlines Weber’s understanding of the administrative official by revisiting his seminal sociological and political writings. The added value of Weber’s conception for IR is demonstrated with an empirical sketch of the EU civil service, which can be analysed as a transnational status group in the making.     

Working with local NGOs: WaterAid's programme in Nepal

This article describes the evolution of WaterAid's programme of work in Nepal, based on the author's experiences while working as WaterAid's Representative Engineer in Nepal from 1987 to 1991. It examines how WaterAid's philosophy of working in partnership with local organisations was actually put into practice. Various problems and constraints are identified and discussed, and certain points are highlighted which may be of general interest to other external support agencies working in similar ways in other countries and sectors. The overall conclusion is that this programme represents a viable methodology for an international NGO to achieve useful results in supporting local NGOs working in development.     

Black banker,white banker: philosophies of the global colour line

Critical study of the ‘global colour line’ usually begins by observing similarities between the colonial–colonized relationship on the one hand, and the developed–developing relationship on the other. Despite the dramatic historical changes in human equality over time, both relationships are sometimes qualified with reference to race and racism. This article reflects on these continuities and changes via two debates in the philosophy of race: the ‘onto-semantic’ and the ‘normative’. Each of these debates, I argue, can help international relations (IR) better understand the complex social meanings and political transformations of the global colour line. After I have made a case for the use of categories of racialization and racialized identity over the category ‘race’, I suggest that IR theorists, too, should pay more critical attention to the burgeoning literatures on racial habits and racial cognition.     

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.     

Capitalism,uneven and combined development and the transhistoric

What is the status of Trotsky's notion of uneven and combined development within Marxist theory and how might it be fruitfully employed by Marxists in international relations? Is uneven and combined development a transhistoric general abstraction or does it need rooting in the relations, processes, tendencies and counter-tendencies of a particular mode of production? This article rejects Justin Rosenberg's recently drawn conclusion that uneven and combined development is usefully understood as a transhistoric general abstraction that potentially offers the basis of a transhistoric theory of the international. Instead it questions the value of transhistoric categories for Marxist theory and pursues the argument that uneven and combined development is best understood within the relations, processes and tendencies of the capitalist mode of production, arguing that capitalist social relations and political forms are historically unique in their capacity to generate both combination and unevenness.     

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.     

Interwar Internationalism, the British Labour Party, and the Historiography of International Relations

This article questions two interrelated myths pertaining to the interwar internationalism of the British Labour Party and the theories of so-called idealists in the academic discipline of International Relations (IR). In IR, interwar "idealists" are (in)famous for a detached and utopian approach to international politics. Conventional historiographical verdicts on the international policy of the Labour Party in the interwar period suggest that the party was the practical mirror of this naïve international outlook. In fact, the two themes are connected, most notably through Labour's Advisory Committee on International Questions . This article brings the study of Labour's internationalism and the international theories of purported idealists together by focusing on debates on the League of Nations and the use of force. The analysis reveals that conventional historiographical narratives are inadequate and too simplistic for grasping the diversity of Labour's internationalism and interwar progressivist ideas about international politics in general.     

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.     

Spatial hierarchy and/or contemporary geopolitics: what can and can't uneven and combined development explain?

This article reviews the current Marxist debate on imperialism through an examination of the concept of uneven and combined development. This has been used in two ways: first, to show that geopolitical competition between advanced capitalist states continues to be of primary importance in the international capitalist order; second, to show how global capital accumulation is an intrinsically uneven, unequal and cumulative process. The article argues that uneven and combined development is limited in its utility for explaining the former, but is of greater utility in the case of the latter. This is further briefly illustrated in the concluding section, which returns to a consideration of imperialism; first, through an examination of the rise of China and ‘decline’ of the United States in the context of the global economic crisis; and, second, through a demonstration of how a Marxist approach that accepts the primacy of cooperation between advanced capitalist states can still provide a critique of a liberal—and imperialist—international order.     

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.     

Can contingency be ‘internalized’ into the bounds of theory? Critical realism,the philosophy of internal relations and the solution of ‘uneven and combined development’

Can general mechanisms governing social life (necessity) and the possibility of multiple outcomes in socio-historical processes (contingency) be incorporated into a single theoretical framework? In recent years, the critical realist philosophy of science has emerged as an intellectual strand within international relations (IR) that makes theoretical claims about necessary social processes while recognizing the irreducible role of contingency. However, critical realist scholars treat contingency as an ‘externality’, thereby declining to theorize social processes that result in contingent outcomes. Here, it is argued that contingency emerges out of the combination of events and processes as theorized by the law of uneven and combined development. This provides a general conceptualization that treats differentiated historical outcomes, and their contingencies, as inherent to human development. Out of these assumptions a workable approach to historical sociology in IR can be developed—one predicated upon uncovering the form of historical ‘combination’, the contingent fusion of elements, in international systems.     

Mind the (Theoretical) Gap: On the Poverty of International Relations Theorising of Uneven and Combined Development

The uneven and combined development (U&CD) approach in International Relations (IR) claims to offer a solution to the question of “the international” with a single, coherent theory capable of uniting both sociological and geopolitical factors in the explanation of social change. The approach thus claims to provide what IR theorists have long been searching for: a social theory of the international. While acknowledging the importance of this research programme to the field of IR scholarship, this article argues that the U&CD approach takes for granted what needs to be theorised, failing to provide the theoretical solution to the “domestic analogy” problem it so powerfully identifies.     

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.