DOCSLIB.ORG

Read Book After Hegemony Cooperation and Discord

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

AFTER HEGEMONY COOPERATION AND DISCORD IN THE WORLD POLITICAL ECONOMY 1ST EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Robert O Keohane | 9780691122489 | | | | | After Hegemony Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy 1st edition PDF Book This book is a comprehensive study of cooperation among the advanced capitalist countries. Sign In Forgot password? Structure may very well require a supporting authority, as realists might argue. In observing the world today, and the stress the UN has come under because of US unilateralism, it is clear to see that Keohane is right on target. Huntington Robert Jervis Peter J. More filters. While military power is an essential requirement of a hegemon, it also needs the tacit acceptance by other states to maintain its status. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Return to Book Page. Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. International relations theory. Hegemony, even limited, seems to still wield enough power to hold most regimes at bay or at least in check. In order to minimize the costs while maximizing the benefits, states cooperate with each other in international institutions. Katzenstein George F. This article about a book on international relations is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. Keohane attempts to explain why the standard Realist assumption of the existence of international discord in the absence of a hegemonic power might not be the future we A classic response to the power theories. Such cooperation persists even in the absence of a hegemon or world government because it benefits states to do so. A nice step beyond hegemonic stability theory and Waltz's neorealism. Rating details. Among these, Robert O. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account. In the preface the author addresses the issue of cooperation after the end of the Soviet empire and with the renewed dominance of the United States, in security matters, as well as recent scholarship on cooperation. Practically unreadable. The cornerstone of neoliberal thought along with Keohane and Nye's Power and Interdependence. The author offers that a hegemon must have the permission of other states to remain such. While the author looks at the two examples of the US and the UK, he does not adequately defend his proposition. No trivia or quizzes yet. This would have been a great contribution on its own without trying to discount the need for a hegemon at the foundation of the international structure. Categories : International relations theory non-fiction books American political books Books about liberalism Books about international relations Princeton University Press books International relations book stubs. In brief, interdependence among states brings both costs and benefits. Oct 20, Raj Agrawal rated it liked it Shelves: saass-books. New issue alert. The oil price dive in a carbonconstrained era: strategies for energy exporters in central Asia. Pavlin rated it it was amazing Oct 21, He received his graduate education at Harvard, where he completed his Ph. Nye, Jr. Citing articles via Google Scholar. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. If you originally registered with a username please use that to sign in. This book is a bit dated in its hope in international "regimes" as described by Keohane. Hidden categories: All stub articles. After hegemony: cooperation and discord in the world political economy After hegemony: cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Institutions can remain even after the hegemon that created them goes into decline, thus supporting the economic system designed by the hegemon. Cooperation may in fact help a state gain more from the international system than trying to acquire gain on its own. Enlarge cover. Sign In. Yes, says Professor Keohane in this outstanding book. To answer this pressing question, Robert Keohane analyzes the institutions, or international regimes, through which cooperation has taken place in the world political econom This book is a comprehensive study of cooperation among the advanced capitalist countries. After Hegemony Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy 1st edition Writer Showing Keohane's foundational text on neoliberaliism, in which he lays out his theory that cooperation can be formed without the need of a hegemon. Listen to our first episode. This book is a comprehensive study of cooperation among the advanced capitalist countries. Advance article alerts. To ask other readers questions about After Hegemony , please sign up. There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Wishing for a hegemonous single world power. Keohane received his bachelor's degree in from Shimer College , a Great Books school where he now sits on the Board of Trustees. Pavlin rated it it was amazing Oct 21, Permissions Icon Permissions. Barry Buzan Barry Buzan. After Hegemony Robert O. Refuting the idea that the decline of hegemony makes cooperation impossible, he views international regimes not as weak substitutes for world government but as devices for facilitating decentralized cooperation among egoistic actors. Nov 27, Mike Edwards rated it liked it Shelves: political-science , war. Enlarge cover. A classic response to the power theories. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Get A Copy. Robert O. Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic. It makes a major contribution towards breaking the destructive polarization between realism and idealism which for far too long has obscured intellectual middle ground of real importance to policy-making. Currently a professor at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University, Keohane has received numerous awards for his scholarship. More Details Thomas Smith rated it it was ok Nov 16, With After Hegemony Robert O. Hegemony, even limited, This book is a bit dated in its hope in international "regimes" as described by Keohane. These institutions provide a forum for bargaining, a centralized bureaucracy for surveillance of compliance, and a dispute resolution mechanism. Modern constructivism Post-modern constructivism Feminist constructivism. After Hegemony Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy 1st edition Reviews Practically unreadable. International ethics Historical sociology Regime theory State cartel theory Geopolitics. This defense is crucial to the rest of his argument; otherwise, his argument would have been solely focused on the benefits of international regimes. A classic liberal "institutionalist" explanation of cooperation in a world of independent, sovereign states. Thanks for telling us about the problem. While the author looks at the two examples of the US and the UK, he does not adequately defend his proposition. With After Hegemony Robert O. This article is also available for rental through DeepDyve. Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic. Pavlin rated it it was amazing Oct 21, This article about a book on international relations is a stub. In order to minimize the costs while maximizing the benefits, states cooperate with each other in international institutions. Barry Jones, Political Studies. Raluca rated it liked it Sep 24, It makes a major contribution towards breaking the destructive polarization between realism and idealism which for far too long has obscured intellectual middle ground of real importance to policy- making. This book is a comprehensive study of cooperation among the advanced capitalist countries. Preview — After Hegemony by Robert O. Hegemony, even limited, This book is a bit dated in its hope in international "regimes" as described by Keohane. Oct 24, Mark rated it really liked it. Marcus rated it really liked it Jul 23, Carr Daniel Deudney Michael W. Sign In or Create an Account. Artur Shumski rated it liked it Jul 31, Matthew rated it liked it Jun 21, In the preface the author addresses the issue of cooperation after the end of the Soviet empire and with the renewed dominance of the United States, in security matters, as well as recent scholarship on cooperation. After Hegemony Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy 1st edition Read Online About Robert O. In brief, interdependence among states brings both costs and benefits. Paperback , pages. The idea that institutions prosper long after hegemony's fall because states want them to is an interesting and poignant proposition. This book is a bit dated in its hope in international "regimes" as described by Keohane. In the preface the author addresses the issue of cooperation after the end of the Soviet empire and with the renewed dominance of the United States, in security matters, as well as recent scholarship on cooperation. Nye, Jr. Oct 24, Mark rated it really liked it. Many of our ebooks are available for purchase from these online vendors:. Keohane's foundational text on neoliberaliism, in which he lays out his theory that cooperation can be formed without the need of a hegemon. One of the early liberal-institutionalist works that would ultimately destroy realism's stranglehold on the field of international relations. You know the saying: There's no time like the present Sep 06, Chris rated it really liked it Recommends it for: IR nerds. Raluca rated it liked it Sep 24, Jan 23, Clayton rated it really liked it. Thomas Smith rated it it was ok Nov 16, Refuting the idea that the decline of hegemony makes cooperation impossible, he views international regimes not as weak substitutes for world government but as devices for facilitating decentralized cooperation among egoistic actors. Gayus rated it it was amazing Aug 20, Keohane attempts to explain why the standard Realist assumption of the existence of international discord in the absence of a hegemonic power might not be the future we Keohane received his bachelor's degree in from Shimer College , a Great Books school where he now sits on the Board of Trustees. Nick "Danger" Douglas rated it liked it Jan 18, There is no way to test this theory without first removing the hegemon from the equation. Hegemony And Cooperation In Practice.
Recommended publications
  • The Dynamics of Russian Foreign Policy in the 2014 Crimean Crisis

    The Dynamics of Russian Foreign Policy in the 2014 Crimean Crisis

    THE DYNAMICS OF RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY IN THE 2014 CRIMEAN CRISIS ASSESSING THE EMPIRICAL AND THEORETICAL COMPLEXITIES By Salman Tahir Submitted to Central European University Department of International Relations and European Studies In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts International Relations and European Studies Supervisor: Professor Michael Merlingen CEU eTD Collection Word Count: 15,342 Budapest, Hungary 2015 Abstract In early 2014, Russian forces entered Crimea and after a successful referendum, annexed the territory to Russia. The dynamics of Russian foreign policy towards Crimea are complex and multifaceted. There is extensive amount of international relations literature that discusses Russian foreign policy that led to the 2014 Crimean War. Neorealists argue that this was a response to Western policies of NATO expansion, EU enlargement and democracy promotion in Eastern Europe. Constructivists blame the history of hostile relations between Russia and the West shaping a Cold War mentality, as well as the threats that Moscow believes Russian citizens faced from Ukrainian radicals and extremists after Euromaidan. Liberalism makes it all about competing economic interests of Russia and the EU. However, there are many other theoretical and empirical complexities and nuances that can help explain Putin’s decision to annex Crimea. This paper will explore the relative theoretical and empirical understandings of the international crisis in Crimea under the international relations theories of neorealism, constructivism and liberalism and disclose the variations and complexities that are inherent within and outside these explanations, as discussed by intellectuals, political experts and media. CEU eTD Collection i Acknowledgements I would like to take this opportunity to extend my deepest gratitude to Michael Merlingen, who was tasked with the supervision of my research by the department and whose valuable guidance is a great part of the reason I was able to conduct this research.
  • Constructivism Meets Critical Realism

    Constructivism Meets Critical Realism

    466572EJT20210.1177/1354066112466572European Journal of International Relations2012Fiaz EJIR Article European Journal of International Relations Constructivism meets critical 2014, Vol. 20(2) 491 –515 © The Author(s) 2012 realism: Explaining Pakistan’s Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav state practice in the DOI: 10.1177/1354066112466572 ejt.sagepub.com aftermath of 9/11 Nazya Fiaz National Defence University, Islamabad, Pakistan Abstract This article investigates the theoretical added-value of critical realist incursions into International Relations constructivism. While constructivism focuses on providing multi- causal explanations, its conceptual horizon and subsequent methodological framework fundamentally obscure and limit the opportunity to conceptualize social dialectic and multi-causality in world politics. In this respect, a critical realist meta-theory can provide constructivism with a greatly expanded conceptual framework that transcends material–ideational divisions, and a framework that is able to envision more clearly the process of social dialectic. Second, critical realism affords a methodological diversity that can withstand simultaneous constructivist investigations into the material, agential, ideational, or structural. Using the synthesis of critical realism and constructivism, I illustrate by way of example by employing Pakistan’s participation in the ‘war on terror’ as a case study. While constructivism can show that Pakistan’s role in the war on terror was preceded by a legitimizing narrative, it is a critical realist depth analysis that sheds new light on how a complex social reality was achieved through the convergence of multi-causal explanatory factors. Keywords Agency, constructivism, critical realism, discourse, meta-theory, multi-causality, Pakistan, social dialectic, structure, war on terror, world politics Corresponding author: Nazya Fiaz, Department of International Relations, National Defence University, Islamabad, Pakistan.
  • NEOREALIST and NEO-GRAMSCIAN HEGEMONY in INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS and CONFLICT RESOLUTION DURING the 1990’S

    NEOREALIST and NEO-GRAMSCIAN HEGEMONY in INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS and CONFLICT RESOLUTION DURING the 1990’S

    Ekonomik ve Sosyal Ara ştırmalar Dergisi, Güz 2005, 1:88-114 NEOREALIST AND NEO-GRAMSCIAN HEGEMONY IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION DURING THE 1990’s Sezai ÖZÇEL İK George Mason University, Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, 3330 N. Washington Blvd. Truland Building, 5th Floor Arlington, VA 22201 [email protected] 1990’LU YILLARDA ULUSLARARASI İLİŞ KİLER VE ÇATI ŞMA ÇÖZÜMÜNDE NEOREAL İZM VE NEO- GRAMS İYAN HEGEMONYA KAVRAMI Abstract The article aims to explain international relations and conflict resolution in combination with the neorealist and neo-Gramscian notions of the hegemony during the 1990s. In the first part, it focuses on neorealist hegemony theories. The Hegemonic Stability Theory (HST) is tested for viability as an explanatory tool of the Cold-War world politics and conflict resolution. Because of the limitations of neorealist hegemony theories, the neo-Gramscian hegemony and related concepts such as historic bloc, passive revolution, civil society and war of position/war of movement are elaborated. Later, the Coxian approach to international relations and world order is explained as a critical theory. Finally, the article attempts to establish a model of structural conflict analysis and resolution. Keywords: Neo-realism, Neo-Gramscian, Hegemony, Conflict Resolution, International Relations Özet Bu makale uluslararası ili şkiler ve çatı şma çözümü kuramlarını neorealist ve neo- Gramsiyan hegemonya kavramlarını çerçevesinde 1990’lı yılları kapsayacak şekilde açıklamayı hedeflemektedir. Birinci
  • The Theory of Hegemonic Stability

    The Theory of Hegemonic Stability

    US-Western European Economic Relations, 1940-1973 Date Event Significance 1941-44 US-UK wartime Technocratic elites in both countries negotiate in negotiations on a new circumstances relatively free of normal domestic international monetary political pressure and trading system July 1944 Bretton Woods Creation of the Bretton Woods twins, the IMF and conference World Bank December 1945 US loan to Britain US attempt to force Britain to accept the Bretton agreed Woods rules June 1947 US Secretary of State A large step away from Bretton Woods towards direct Marshall announces US aid and promoting regionalism in Europe ‘Marshall aid’ July-August British pound returns to The final failure of Hull’s vision of forcing Britain to 1947 convertibility, but this is accept Bretton Woods revoked as reserves are rapidly drained 30 October GATT signed in Geneva Interim agreement on trade principles, and draft 1947 agreement on the establishment of the ITO by 23 countries March 1948 Havana World Agreement on the charter of the ITO by over 60 Conference on Trade and countries Employment June 1950 Creation of European Facilitated the reconstruction of European trade and Payments Union payments on a regional basis, rather than on the basis of Bretton Woods April 1951 Signing of the Treaty of Creates the European Coal and Steel Community Paris March 1957 Signing of the Treaty of Creates the EEC and Euratom, the former leading to the Rome creation of a large trading bloc, changing the nature of GATT bargaining December 1958 European currencies The Bretton
  • An Evaluation of the Constructivist Critique in International Relations

    An Evaluation of the Constructivist Critique in International Relations

    A world of their making: an evaluation of the constructivist critique in international relations Article (Published Version) Palan, Ronen (2000) A world of their making: an evaluation of the constructivist critique in international relations. Review of International Studies, 26 (4). 575 - 598. ISSN 0260-2105 This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/12407/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse: Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University. Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. http://sro.sussex.ac.uk Review of International
  • INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, PRINCIPAL THEORIES International Relations, Principal Theories

    INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, PRINCIPAL THEORIES International Relations, Principal Theories

    INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, PRINCIPAL THEORIES International Relations, Principal Theories Anne-Marie Slaughter TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 B. Realism ................................................................................................................................................... 2 C. Institutionalism ....................................................................................................................................... 8 D. Liberalism ............................................................................................................................................. 14 E. Constructivism ...................................................................................................................................... 19 F. The English School ............................................................................................................................... 24 G. Critical Approaches .............................................................................................................................. 26 H. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 28 A. Introduction 1 The study of international relations takes a wide range of theoretical approaches. Some emerge from within the discipline itself; others have been imported, in
  • Bridging the Gap: Toward a Realist-Constructivist Dialogue

    Bridging the Gap: Toward a Realist-Constructivist Dialogue

    International Studies Review (2004) 6, 337–352 THE FORUM Bridging the Gap: Toward A Realist-Constructivist Dialogue EDITED BY PATRICK THADDEUS JACKSON School of International Service, American University Editor’s Note: J. Samuel Barkin’s International Studies Review article ‘‘Realist Con- structivism’’ (2003) makes the important point that the opposition between realist and con- structivist schools of thought in international relations (IR) may not be as clear-cut as is commonly supposed. In doing so, he focuses on how certain classical realist notions are compatible with constructivist sensibilities about the role of norms and other intersubjective factors in producing social and political outcomes. In effect, Barkin proposes a fusion of certain elements of realism and constructivism to produce a novel IR perspective. Although Barkin is not the first or only scholar to advocate a more evenhanded dialogue between realism and constructivism, his piece is one of the most comprehensive attempts to articulate points of agreement between the two approaches and to delineate the contours of a ‘‘realist- constructivist’’ research program. As such, Barkin’s piece provides an excellent opportunity for exploring and elaborating the nature of and possibilities for ‘‘realist constructivism.’’ Barkin’s emphasis on the tension between normative transformation and the limits imposed by power in the international arena is one way to initiate a dialogue between realism and constructivism. The contributors to this Forum are each trying, in their different ways, to further this dialogue and to explore the possibilities raised by dissociating constructivism from the liberal tradition. They share Barkin’s basic contention that realism and constructivism are not implacably opposed.
  • Trump, American Hegemony and the Future of the Liberal International Order

    Trump, American Hegemony and the Future of the Liberal International Order

    Trump, American hegemony and the future of the liberal international order DOUG STOKES* The postwar liberal international order (LIO) has been a largely US creation. Washington’s consensus, geopolitically bound to the western ‘core’ during the Cold War, went global with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the advent of systemic unipolarity. Many criticisms can be levelled at US leadership of the LIO, not least in respect of its claim to moral superiority, albeit based on laudable norms such as human rights and democracy. For often cynical reasons the US backed authoritarian regimes throughout the Cold War, pursued disastrous forms of regime change after its end, and has been deeply hostile to alternative (and often non-western) civilizational orders that reject its dogmas. Its successes, however, are manifold. Its ‘empire by invitation’ has helped secure a durable European peace, soften east Asian security dilemmas, and underwrite the strategic preconditions for complex and pacifying forms of global interdependence. Despite tactical differences between global political elites, a postwar commit- ment to maintain the LIO, even in the context of deep structural shifts in interna- tional relations, has remained resolute—until today. The British vote to leave the EU (arguably as much a creation of the United States as of its European members), has weakened one of the most important institutions of the broader US-led LIO. More destabilizing to the foundations of the LIO has been the election of President Trump. His administration has actively
  • Bound to Fail John J. Mearsheimer the Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order

    Bound to Fail John J. Mearsheimer the Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order

    Bound to Fail Bound to Fail John J. Mearsheimer The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order By 2019, it was clear that the liberal international order was in deep trouble. The tectonic plates that underpin it are shifting, and little can be done to repair and rescue it. Indeed, that order was destined to fail from the start, as it contained the seeds of its own destruction. The fall of the liberal international order horriªes the Western elites who built it and who have beneªted from it in many ways.1 These elites fervently believe that this order was and remains an important force for promoting peace and prosperity around the globe. Many of them blame President Donald Trump for its demise. After all, he expressed contempt for the liberal order when campaigning for president in 2016; and since taking ofªce, he has pur- sued policies that seem designed to tear it down. It would be a mistake, however, to think that the liberal international order is in trouble solely because of Trump’s rhetoric or policies. In fact, more funda- mental problems are at play, which account for why Trump has been able to successfully challenge an order that enjoys almost universal support among the foreign policy elites in the West. The aim of this article is to determine why the liberal world order is in big trouble and to identify the kind of inter- national order that will replace it. I offer three main sets of arguments. First, because states in the modern world are deeply interconnected in a variety of ways, orders are essential for facilitating efªcient and timely interactions.
  • Theories of Hegemony in International Relations: Ontology and Social

    Theories of Hegemony in International Relations: Ontology and Social

    Hegemony and international relations Article (Accepted Version) Antoniades, Andreas (2018) Hegemony and international relations. International Politics, 55 (5). pp. 595-611. ISSN 1384-5748 This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/70470/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse: Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University. Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. http://sro.sussex.ac.uk A VERSION OF THIS PAPER IS FORTCOMING IN THE JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL POLITICS HEGEMONY AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Andreas Antoniades Senior Lecturer in Global Political Economy Department of International Relations University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9SN, UK Tel: +44 (0)1273 872875 Email: [email protected] Abstract The paper interrogates the current state-of-the-art in hegemony analysis in International Relations (IR).
  • Is Growing China a Real Challenge to the U.S. Power?

    Is Growing China a Real Challenge to the U.S. Power?

    International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 5, No. 10(1); October 2015 Is Growing China A Real Challenge To The U.S. Power? Abdul Salaam Khan1 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to discuss the global hegemonic power of the United States of America as presented by different international theorists with special reference to the rise of People’s Republic of China and the possible transition of global power from West to the East. The paper comprises of six parts: first part presents the history and evolution of the US hegemonic power after the World War II, second highlights scholars like Robert Gilpin, Robert Keohane, Joseph Nye, James Petras and Immanuel Waller stein that the American hegemony has declined after the 1970s, thirdly it presents scholars like Stephen Gill and Susan Strange that the hegemonic dominance of the United States in the global affairs is still intact, fourth part discusses the rise of the People’s Republic of China as major challenge to the future US global power, fifthly it presents comparative analysis of the USA and China politically, economically, militarily, educationally, demographically and geographically and at the end it gives long term discussion and analysis in the context of global power of the United States and rising China. 1. Introduction After the World War II, the United States has become hegemonic due to its unmatched economic, military, political and cultural influence in global affairs. The American global order was basically characterized by liberal democracy and free capitalist economy. The hegemonic power of the United States in the post-World War II has been presented differently by different scholars.
  • Integrating Integration Theory: Neo-Functionalism and International Regimes

    Integrating Integration Theory: Neo-Functionalism and International Regimes

    Global Society, Vol. 10, No. 3, 1996 225 Integrating Integration Theory: Neo-functionalism and International Regimes THOMAS GEHRING It is common to juxtapose inter-governmentalism and neo-functionalism as the two most important, and seemingly mutually exclusive, frameworks to interpret the phenomenon of "European integration" and its institutional dimension, the European Community.1 Inter-governmentalism promises to offer a broadly applicable concept for the analysis of international cooperative institutions.2 It recognises that the Com­ munity emerged from the self-help based international system and emphasises the continuing central role of the member states. However, conceiving of the Community as one international institution among many others it tends to disregard the specificities of this particular institution. Moreover, inter-govern­ mentalism is conceptionally founded on a state-centred and static approach to institutions and cannot, therefore, cope with integration as a process of develop­ ment over time, nor does it readily accommodate the role of non-state actors within the Community system. 1. A single European Community did not formally exist prior to the Maastricht Accord, while the same treaty established the "European Union" in which three original Communities are now embedded. To ayoid confusion, the present article uses the term "European Community" for the comprehensive institution both in its pre-Maastricht and post-Maastricht (i.e. Union) stage. 2. Stanley Hoffmann, "Obstinate or Obsolete? The Fate of the Nation-State and the Case of Western Europe", Daedalus, Vol. 95, No. 3 (1966), pp. 862-915; Stanley Hoffmann, "Reflections on the Nation-State in Western Europe Today", journal of Common Market Studies, Vol.