DOCSLIB.ORG

Power Analysis As a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding Power and Governance in the Second Gulf War

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Power Analysis As a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding Power and Governance in the Second Gulf War EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE Department of Political and Social Sciences Power Analysis as a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding Power and Governance in the Second Gulf War Stefano Guzzini Thesis submitted for assessment with a view to obtaining the Degree of Doctor of the European University Institute Department of Political and Social Sciences Examining Jury Prof. David Baldwin (Columbia University, New York) Prof. Pierre Hassner (CERI, IEP, Paris) Prof. Steven Lukes (EUI, co-supervisor) Prof. Susan Strange (University of Warwick, external professor EUI, supervisor) Ole Wæver (Center for Conflict and Peace Research and University Copenhagen) Florence October 1994 EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE Department of Political and Social Sciences Power Analysis as a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding Power and Governance in the Second Gulf War Stefano Guzzini Thesis submitted for assessment with a view to obtaining the Degree of Doctor of the European University Institute Department of Political and Social Sciences Examining Jury Prof. David Baldwin (Columbia University, New York) Prof. Pierre Hassner (CERI, IEP, Paris) Prof. Steven Lukes (EUI, co-supervisor) Prof. Susan Strange (University of Warwick, external professor EUI, supervisor) Ole Wæver (Center for Conflict and Peace Research and University Copenhagen) Florence October 1994 Guzzini, Stefano (1994), Power Analysis as a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding power and governance in the second Gulf war European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/47026 Guzzini, Stefano (1994), Power Analysis as a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding power and governance in the second Gulf war European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/47026 Acknowledgements This work would have been inconceivable without the support of the European University Institute, both for the material and working conditions, and for its intellectually stimulating, albeit luckily not too competitive human environment. Let me first thank all those at the EUI who made this research possible. I would also like to thank Iver B. Neumann and Marc Smyrl for having tried to improve my language. Furthermore, I have much profited from seminar interventions by or discussions with Ian Carter, Thomas Christiansen, Johan Jeroen De Deken, Helmut Dubiel, Maurice Glasman, Daniela Gobetti, Rainer Grundmann, Markus Jachtenfuchs, Knud-Erik Jørgensen, Philippe Marlière, Jean-Pierre Malrieu, Véronique Muñoz-Dardé, Erik Ringmar, Stefan Rossbach, Emilio Santoro, Davide Sparti, Michael Suhr, Yves Sintomer, and Arpád Szakolcsai. I would especially like to thank the seminars and private discussions with Gunther Teubner and Alessandro Pizzorno who have provided a continuing challenge and encouragement to develop my theoretical thoughts. The present study developed over a long time. For comments on my “June Paper”, I am particularly thankful to Robert Gilpin, Peter Morriss, Ronen Palan, and Roger Tooze. Chapter 2 is an outgrowth of a manuscript on the state of the art in IR/IPE, that, in turn, synthesised several chapters from a Working Paper entitled “The Continuing Story of a Death Foretold: Realism in International Relations/International Political Economy” (SPS 92/20). It was improved by suggestions from Chris Hill, Mark Hoffman, Jef Huysmans, Reinhard Meyers, Gunther Teubner, Ronen Palan, and Rob Walker. A previous version of chapter 6 has been published in International Organization, vol. 47, no. 3 (Summer 1993). For very helpful suggestions on drafts and on the final version of the article, I am indebted to David Baldwin, Alan Cafruny, Stewart Clegg, James S. Coleman, Robert Cox, Stephen Gill, Pierre Hassner, John MacLean, Reinhard Meyers, Andrew Moravcsik, Alessandro Pizzorno, John Odell and two anonymous reviewers. Previous drafts on Part IV and V of the thesis have been commented by Pierre Hassner, Chris Hill, Iver B. Neumann, and Ghassan Salamé. My very special gratitude goes to Heikki Patomäki who thoroughly commented this and several other of my writings, pointing to shortcomings, partly still unresolved. Finally, I want to thank those who have read and commented all drafts and without whom the present thesis would have been unthinkable. Ole Wæver incessantly encouraged me to develop my thoughts and suggested several paths for this purpose. Over the years in Florence, Steven Lukes’ methodological and substantial hints and criticisms made this very enterprise of a conceptual analysis of power in IR/IPE possible. Susan Strange often played not only the “midwife”, as she calls it, but also the devil’s advocate so as to force me to clearer thought and expression. In countless discussions, Anna Leander influenced my thinking, and helped me to resolve several deadlocks during the writing. Although I do not think to have matched all the criticisms, I did my best to honour them. The thesis is dedicated to Anna. Florence, October 1994 Stefano Guzzini Guzzini, Stefano (1994), Power Analysis as a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding power and governance in the second Gulf war European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/47026 Guzzini, Stefano (1994), Power Analysis as a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding power and governance in the second Gulf war European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/47026 Table of Contents Part I. Introduction Chapter 1. Puzzles of a Power Analysis ...............................3 1. Making sense of power puzzles: origins and limits of a conceptual analysis (3) 2. A historical moment foregone? The Second Gulf War and the trasformismo of the “New World Order” (6) 3. The outline of the argument (8) Part II. A conceptual analysis of power during the crisis of Realism Chapter 2. International Theory after the Inter-Paradigm Debate ......... 15 1. “Colour it Kuhn” (16) 2. Searching borders (22) 3. Theoretical rapprochements as the context of new power concepts (30) 4. Power Analysis: increased agency potential and diffusion of rule (34) Chapter 3. Understanding the concept of power ...................... 35 1. Assumptions of a conceptual analysis (35) 2. The ambiguity of “power” (38) 3. Purposes of power (39) 4. Power as an “essentially contested” concept? (45) 5. Conclusion: Explanatory perspectivism (53) Part III. Realist Power Analysis and Its Critics Chapter 4. The Inevitable “Struggle for Power” in Realist Explanations .... 63 1. The Balance of Power as Theory (64) 2. Purposes and limits of power in the “Second debate” (72) 3. Conclusion: The aims and limits of “power” in Realist explanations (80) Chapter 5. Relational Power and Causal Analysis in Neorealism .......... 82 1. The economistic approach to power in IR revisited (83) 2. David Baldwin’s concept and assessment of power (86) 3. The assessment of power under different models of the international system (92) 4. Neorealist Power Analysis (98) Chapter 6. Structural Power: The Limits of Neorealist Power Analysis ..... 100 1. Beyond Neorealism? Meanings of structural power (101) 2. A power analysis with a dyad of concepts (115) 3. Conclusion: Purposes and meanings of power and governance (123) V Guzzini, Stefano (1994), Power Analysis as a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding power and governance in the second Gulf war European University Institute DOI: 10.2870/47026 Part IV. Neorealist power analysis of the Second Gulf War Chapter 7. Neorealist Power Assumptions .......................... 129 1. The “logic” of power: “collateral pressure” and “osmosis” (129) 2. Relational “securities” (131) 3. Behavioural assumptions (132) 4. Conclusion: Questions of a Neorealist Power-Analysis (136) Chapter 8. Origins of the conflict: Power shifts in the Middle Eastern security complex ................................................. 139 1. A regional hegemonic war in a “unipolar moment” (141) 2. Beyond military security: political and financial destabilisation (154) 3. Conclusion: The Gulf in search of an equilibrium (164) Chapter 9. The dynamics of the conflict: overcoming the “Vietnam Syndrome” .............................................. 166 1. The multilateralisation of the conflict (167) 2. Influencing the public opinion (182) 3. From the “Rapid Deployment Force” to “Desert Storm” (189) 4. Conclusion: The Gulf conflict — unnecessary and inevitable (193) Chapter 10. “War and Change” in the Middle Eastern Security Complex . 195 1. A new kind of war for a new kind of security? (195) 2. Installing a balance of wealth and legitimacy? (202) 3. A new regional balance of power (207) 4. A precedent for conflict management in the “new world order”? (223) 5. Conclusion: The inconclusive victory (230) Part V. An analysis of governance through the Second Gulf War Chapter 11. Assumptions of an analysis of governance ................ 237 1. Constructivism (238) 2. Intersubjective practices as unit of analysis (240) 3. The analysis of governance (245) Chapter 12. The clash of legitimation processes ...................... 254 1. The Legitimacy Problem in Changing Arab Societies: Iraq’s fuite en avant reconsidered (254) 2. The tacit power of the strong: effects of superpower practices (264) 3. Conclusion: Social contracts, whether stabilised abroad or not (277) Chapter 13. Governance through collective memory: just war tales and the World War II script ....................................... 279 1. Symbolic Power or the ritualised mobilisation of collective memory (279) 2. The metaphorical construction of legitimate action (289) VI Guzzini, Stefano (1994), Power Analysis as a Critique of Power Politics: Understanding power and governance in the second
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reactionary Postmodernism? Neoliberalism, Multiculturalism, the Internet, and the Ideology of the New Far Right in Germany
    University of Vermont ScholarWorks @ UVM UVM Honors College Senior Theses Undergraduate Theses 2018 Reactionary Postmodernism? Neoliberalism, Multiculturalism, the Internet, and the Ideology of the New Far Right in Germany William Peter Fitz University of Vermont Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/hcoltheses Recommended Citation Fitz, William Peter, "Reactionary Postmodernism? Neoliberalism, Multiculturalism, the Internet, and the Ideology of the New Far Right in Germany" (2018). UVM Honors College Senior Theses. 275. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/hcoltheses/275 This Honors College Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Undergraduate Theses at ScholarWorks @ UVM. It has been accepted for inclusion in UVM Honors College Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ UVM. For more information, please contact [email protected]. REACTIONARY POSTMODERNISM? NEOLIBERALISM, MULTICULTURALISM, THE INTERNET, AND THE IDEOLOGY OF THE NEW FAR RIGHT IN GERMANY A Thesis Presented by William Peter Fitz to The Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of The University of Vermont In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements For the Degree of Bachelor of Arts In European Studies with Honors December 2018 Defense Date: December 4th, 2018 Thesis Committee: Alan E. Steinweis, Ph.D., Advisor Susanna Schrafstetter, Ph.D., Chairperson Adriana Borra, M.A. Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter One: Neoliberalism and Xenophobia 17 Chapter Two: Multiculturalism and Cultural Identity 52 Chapter Three: The Philosophy of the New Right 84 Chapter Four: The Internet and Meme Warfare 116 Conclusion 149 Bibliography 166 1 “Perhaps one will view the rise of the Alternative for Germany in the foreseeable future as inevitable, as a portent for major changes, one that is as necessary as it was predictable.
    [Show full text]
  • Reaching Beyond the Ivory Tower: a “How To” Manual *
    Reaching Beyond the Ivory Tower: A “How To” Manual * Daniel Byman and Matthew Kroenig Security Studies (forthcoming, June 2016) *For helpful comments on earlier versios of this article, the authors would like to thank Michael C. Desch, Rebecca Friedman, Bruce Jentleson, Morgan Kaplan, Marc Lynch, Jeremy Shapiro, and participants in the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security Speaker Series at the University of Chicago, participants in the Nuclear Studies Research Initiative Launch Conference, Austin, Texas, October 17-19, 2013, and members of a Midwest Political Science Association panel. Particular thanks to two anonymous reviewers and the editors of Security Studies for their helpful comments. 1 Joseph Nye, one of the rare top scholars with experience as a senior policymaker, lamented “the walls surrounding the ivory tower never seemed so high” – a view shared outside the academy and by many academics working on national security.1 Moreover, this problem may only be getting worse: a 2011 survey found that 85 percent of scholars believe the divide between scholars’ and policymakers’ worlds is growing. 2 Explanations range from the busyness of policymakers’ schedules, a disciplinary shift that emphasizes theory and methodology over policy relevance, and generally impenetrable academic prose. These and other explanations have merit, but such recommendations fail to recognize another fundamental issue: even those academic works that avoid these pitfalls rarely shape policy.3 Of course, much academic research is not designed to influence policy in the first place. The primary purpose of academic research is not, nor should it be, to shape policy, but to expand the frontiers of human knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Susan Strange and the Future of Global Political Economy
    The State of Copyright Asymmetric Crisis in Europe and Susan Strange and the Future The Complex Relationships of Possible Futures Cultural Creation in a Globalized Critical Political Economy and of Global Political Economy World Post-Keynesian Perspectives Debora J Halbert Edited by Johanne5 Jfiger and Power, control and transformation Elisabeth Springier Transnational Financial Regulation after the Crisis Hybrid Rule and State Formation Edited by Tony Porter Public-Pri\ ate Power in the 21st Century Edited by Shelley L. Hurt and The Political Economy of Global Ronnie D. Lipschut::: Capitalism and Crisis Edited by Randall Germain Bill Dunn Global Economic Gowrnance and the Dewlopment Practices of the Global Capitalism l\Iultilateral Dewlopment Banks Selected Essays Edited b1· Susan Park and Jonathan R. Hugo Radice Strand Debtfare States and the Poverty Ethics and Economic Gowrnance Industry Using Adam Smith to Understand the Jvlone.y. Discipline and the Surplus Global Financial Crisis Chris Clarke Susan Strange and the Future of Currency Challenge Global Political Economy The Euro. the Dollar and the Global PO\Yer. Control and Transformation Financial Crisis Randall Germain Miguel Otero-Iglesias Culture, Political Economy and Fringe Finance Civilization in a Multipolar \Vorld Crossing and Contesting the Borders Order of Global Capital The Case of Russia Rob Aitken Rcn Sih·ius ~~ ~~o~~!:n~R~up LONDON AND NEW YORK 7 Money, power, authority Benjanzin J Cohen Introduction The financial crisis that engulfed the world economy in 2008 would not have surprised Susan Strange. Indeed, some would say that she predicted it in her last publications prior to her untimely death in 1998.
    [Show full text]
  • Intergovernmental Organizations and Foreign Policy Behavior: Some Empirical Findings James M
    Political Science Publications Political Science 1979 Intergovernmental Organizations and Foreign Policy Behavior: Some Empirical Findings James M. McCormick Iowa State University, [email protected] Young W. Khil Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/pols_pubs Part of the American Politics Commons, Defense and Security Studies Commons, Other Political Science Commons, and the Policy Design, Analysis, and Evaluation Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ pols_pubs/28. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Political Science at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Intergovernmental Organizations and Foreign Policy Behavior: Some Empirical Findings Abstract In this study, we evaluate whether the increase in the number of intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) has resulted in their increased use for foreign policy behavior by the nations of the world. This question is examined in three related ways: (1) the aggregate use of IGOs for foreign policy behavior; (2) the relationship between IGO membership and IGO use; and (3) the kinds of states that use IGOs. Our data base consists of the 35 nations in the CREON (Comparative Research on the Events of Nations) data set for the years 1959-1968. The ainm findings are that IGOs were employed over 60 percent of the time with little fluctuation on a year- by-year basis, that global and "high politics" IGOs were used more often than regional and "low politics" IGOs, that institutional membership and IGO use were generally inversely related, and that the attributes of the states had limited utility in accounting for the use of intergovernmental organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Susan Strange—A Critical Appreciation
    Review of International Studies (1999), 25, 531–535 Copyright © British International Studies Association Susan Strange—a critical appreciation CHRIS BROWN For a quarter of a century, Susan Strange—who died in October 1998—was the most influential figure in British international studies. While she held a number of key academic posts in Britain, Italy and Japan (including a ten-year stint as Montague Burton Professor of International Relations at LSE from 1978–88) and although she was a major figure in the professional associations of both Britain and the US (founder member and first Treasurer of BISA, President of ISA in 1995), it was predominantly as a creative scholar and a forceful personality that she exercised this influence. She was almost single-handedly responsible for creating ‘international political economy’ and turning it into one of the two or three central fields within international studies in Britain, and she defended her creation with such robustness, and made such strong claims on its behalf, that her influence was felt—albeit not always welcomed—in most other areas of the discipline. After taking a first in Economics at LSE in 1943, she spent most of the next twenty years raising six children and pursuing a career as a journalist, initially with the Economist and then with the Observer at first in Washington and at the UN, then in London as economics correspondent, meanwhile teaching off and on at University College London. Her years as a journalist were undoubtedly important, and the fact that she came to an academic life at a comparatively late age almost certainly contributed to her notorious unwillingness to be seduced by the joys of learning for learning’s sake and her ambivalent attitude to academic institutions, but it was during the years from 1965–76 when she was a full-time researcher at Chatham House that her project took shape.
    [Show full text]
  • US and the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Eric Helleiner University of Wate
    Still an Extraordinary Power After All These Years: US and the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Eric Helleiner University of Waterloo June 2014 Acknowledgements: I am grateful for comments from Randy Germain and Herman Schwartz. Parts of this paper are drawn from Helleiner 2014. I am grateful to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for helping to fund this research. Susan Strange is well known for her interventions into discussions about the trajectory of US hegemony. At a time when scholars fiercely debated the consequences of declining US hegemony, she questioned the underlying assumption being made. Scholars across the theoretical spectrum, she argued, failed to recognize the enduring nature of the US power, particularly in its structural form. She argued that scholars of international political economy often neglected the significance of structural power which she defined as “the power to shape and determine the structures of the global political economy within which other states, their political institutions, their economic enterprises, and (not least) their scientists and other professional people have to operate.”1 Strange was particularly keen to highlight the importance of enduring US structural power in the global financial arena where she argued that outcomes continued to be influenced by the unmatched ability of the US to control and shape the environment within which others operated.2 Strange’s concept of structural power has been sometimes criticized for its lack of precision.3 How is structural power exercised and over whom? What are its sources? What can it accomplish? These kinds of analytical questions were not always addressed in great detail in Strange’s writings.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union in the 21St Century
    THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE 21ST CENTURY PERSPECTIVES FROM THE LISBON TREATY EDITED BY STEFANO MICOSSI AND GIAN LUIGI TOSATO INTRODUCTION BY SABINO CASSESE CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN POLICY STUDIES BRUSSELS The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is an independent policy research institute based in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound analytical research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe today. CEPS Paperbacks present analysis and views by leading experts on important questions in the arena of European public policy, written in a style aimed at an informed but generalist readership. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors writing in a personal capacity and do not necessarily reflect those of CEPS or any other institution with which they are associated. Cover: Claude Monet, Impression, soleil levant, 1872 Musée Marmottan, Paris ISBN 978-92-9079-929-0 © Copyright 2009, Centre for European Policy Studies. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without the prior permission of the Centre for European Policy Studies. Centre for European Policy Studies Place du Congrès 1, B-1000 Brussels Tel: 32 (0) 2 229.39.11 Fax: 32 (0) 2 219.41.51 e-mail: [email protected] internet: http://www.ceps.eu CONTENTS Preface............................................................................................................................ i 1. Introduction: Im Zweifel für Europa Sabino Cassese.......................................................................................................1 1. The European Union: Reasons for success ..................................................1 2. The crisis and its paradoxes...........................................................................2 3. A realistic agenda............................................................................................4 Part I.
    [Show full text]
  • Postmodern Imperialism and the European Union
    Troyer I Postmodern Imperialism and the European Union An Honors Thesis (POLS 404) by Tanner Troyer Thesis Advisor Dr. E. Gene Frankland Ball State University Muncie, Indiana December 2011 Expected Date of Graduation December 2011 Troyer" Abstract Throughout history, dominant nations have exerted control over foreign parts of the world. In the past, powerful nations would colonize other parts of the world in order to expand their own reach . This practice was referred to as imperialism. Imperialism often involved direct violence, coercion, and subjugation of native populations. Colonial imperialism is a thing of the past. Despite this, dominant powers still exert their influence on other parts of the world. This is referred to as postmodern imperialism. The most common methods of postmodern imperialism involve the spread of capitalism and culture to other nations. Dominant powers such as the United States and European Union are involved with these practices. This paper will focus on the European Union and how its policies exert influence upon other nations in a manner consistent with postmodern imperialism. Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Gene Frankland for being my advisor for this project. Writing this paper was one of the hardest parts of my college career, and I would not have been able to do it without him. I would also like to thank David Hekel, James Robinson, and Alex Jung for the help and encouragement they gave during the making of this paper. Troyer III Outline I. Introduction A. What is imperialism? B. Why is it important? II. Literature Review - Imperialism of Today A.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Cincinnati
    UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date: 11-Dec-2009 I, Marjon E. Kamrani , hereby submit this original work as part of the requirements for the degree of: Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science It is entitled: "Keeping the Faith in Global Civil Society: Illiberal Democracy and the Cases of Reproductive Rights and Trafficking" Student Signature: This work and its defense approved by: Committee Chair: Anne Runyan, PhD Laura Jenkins, PhD Joel Wolfe, PhD 3/3/2010 305 Keeping the Faith in Global Civil Society: Illiberal Democracy and the Cases of Reproductive Rights and Trafficking A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science of the College of Arts and Science by Marjon Kamrani M.A., M.P.A. University of Texas B.A. Miami University March 2010 Committee Chair: Anne Sisson Runyan, Ph.D ABSTRACT What constitutes global civil society? Are liberal assumptions about the nature of civil society as a realm autonomous from and balancing the power of the state and market transferrable to the global level? Does global civil society necessarily represent and/or result in the promotion of liberal values? These questions guided my dissertation which attempts to challenge dominant liberal conceptualizations of global civil society. To do so, it provides two representative case studies of how domestic and transnational factions of the Religious Right, acting in concert with (or as agents of) the US state, and the political opportunity structures it has provided under conservative regimes, gain access to global policy-making forums through a reframing of international human rights discourses and practices pertaining particularly to women’s rights in order to shift them in illiberal directions.
    [Show full text]
  • International Relations in a Changing World: a New Diplomacy? Edward Finn
    INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN A CHANGING WORLD: A NEW DIPLOMACY? EDWARD FINN Edward Finn is studying Comparative Literature in Latin and French at Princeton University. INTRODUCTION The revolutionary power of technology to change reality forces us to re-examine our understanding of the international political system. On a fundamental level, we must begin with the classic international relations debate between realism and liberalism, well summarised by Stephen Walt.1 The third paradigm of constructivism provides the key for combining aspects of both liberalism and realism into a cohesive prediction for the political future. The erosion of sovereignty goes hand in hand with the burgeoning Information Age’s seemingly unstoppable mechanism for breaking down physical boundaries and the conceptual systems grounded upon them. Classical realism fails because of its fundamental assumption of the traditional sovereignty of the actors in its system. Liberalism cannot adequately quantify the nebulous connection between prosperity and freedom, which it assumes as an inherent truth, in a world with lucrative autocracies like Singapore and China. Instead, we have to accept the transformative power of ideas or, more directly, the technological, social, economic and political changes they bring about. From an American perspective, it is crucial to examine these changes, not only to understand their relevance as they transform the US, but also their effects in our evolving global relationships.Every development in international relations can be linked to some event that happened in the past, but never before has so much changed so quickly at such an expansive global level. In the first section of this article, I will examine the nature of recent technological changes in diplomacy and the larger derivative effects in society, which relate to the future of international politics.
    [Show full text]
  • International Relations Theory
    Political Science 240/IRGN 254 International Relations Theory (Spring Quarter 2003) Prof. Stephan Haggard (Office hours, Monday 12-2, Robinson Building 1425 or by appointment at [email protected] or 4-5781) This course provides an introduction to some strands of contemporary international relations theory. Writing requirements (approximately 60 percent). Three five page papers on the assigned readings, due in class on the day of the discussion (late papers will not be accepted). Alternatively, you may write a single, 15-20 page review essay that deals with the assigned and background readings for a particular session in greater depth. “Background” readings include important or exemplary statements on a particular issue, provide more on the history of a given debate, or suggest cognate areas of inquiry that we cannot explore in depth (or even at all). Seminar participation (approximately 40 percent). In addition to active participation in the discussion, students will be responsible for initiating one or two seminars—depending on class size-- through a brief (10-15 minute) presentation. The presentation will simply outline some of the most important questions that arise out of the readings. The following books have been ordered for purchase. David A. Lake and Robert Powell, eds., Strategic Choice and International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999. Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1979. Helen V. Milner, Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997. Peter J. Katzenstein, Robert O. Keohane, and Stephen D. Krasner, eds., Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics.
    [Show full text]
  • The 'Great Debates' in International Relations Theory
    The ‘Great Debates’ in international relations theory Written by IJ Benneyworth This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. The ‘Great Debates’ in international relations theory https://www.e-ir.info/2011/05/20/the-%e2%80%98great-debates%e2%80%99-in-international-relations-theory/ IJ BENNEYWORTH, MAY 20 2011 International relations in the most basic sense have existed since neighbouring tribes started throwing rocks at, or trading with, each other. From the Peloponnesian War, through European poleis to ultimately nation states, Realist trends can be observed before the term existed. Likewise the evolution of Liberalist thinking, from the Enlightenment onwards, expressed itself in calls for a better, more cooperative world before finding practical application – if little success – after The Great War. It was following this conflict that the discipline of International Relations (IR) emerged in 1919. Like any science, theory was IR’s foundation in how it defined itself and viewed the world it attempted to explain, and when contradictory theories emerged clashes inevitably followed. These disputes throughout IR’s short history have come to be known as ‘The Great Debates’, and though disputed it is generally felt there have been four, namely ‘Realism/Liberalism’, ‘Traditionalism/Behaviouralism’, ‘Neorealism/Neoliberalism’ and the most recent ‘Rationalism/Reflectivism’. All have had an effect on IR theory, some greater than others, but each merit analysis of their respective impacts. First we shall briefly explore the historical development of IR theory then critically assess each Debate before concluding.
    [Show full text]