Search results

Throughout the history of International Relations, borders have been marginalised both practically and, to a greater extent, theoretically. On the one hand, conceptualizations of borders are typically subordinate to other ideas within the field, such as sovereignty, territory, security, conflict, and peace. On the other hand, it is frequently regarded as a source of conflict or simply as a geographical boundary. Thus, it is not surprising that this situation of marginalisation (conventional view of boundaries) produced a hegemonic perspective on borders until the conclusion of the Cold War. Nonetheless, the rearrangement of the international system and the expansion of regional integration resulted in a more dynamic, complex, and multidimensional outline. This work seeks to answer the following research question: in what ways would a perspective contribute to the field of border studies? It is proposed that such a theoretical framework would reassign border studies from an underlying to a fundamental premise, elevating them to a more significant level. This reinterpretation has direct and indirect effects on border politics in practice.

The Gramscian thinking has been increasingly used in the fields of Political Science and International Relations, however, prioritizing its concept of hegemony. In this article, it is proposed both, a more accurate elucidation and a possible transposition of the concept of the historical bloc to the international scenario, having as the main question the following study inquiry: can we transpose the concept of the historical bloc developed by Gramsci for International Relations of the 21st century, taking into account its transnational nature? Methodologically, a deductive, qualitative approach is used, with a literature review based on data collection from secondary sources. It is understood that the notion of the historical bloc coined by Gramsci, followed by the assumptions of critical theorists, helps us to understand the difficulties of the current international relations. The versatility of this concept allows us to endorse a macro view of the many facets of International Relations, whether they are linked to the political, economic, social, and even ideological spheres. Gramsci; Transnational Historical Bloc; International Relations; Hegemony; Critical Theory.

Texto da comunicação apresentada a 53rd ISA Annual Convention, San Diego, Ca., USA, 1- 4 April 2012 ; This paper aims to discuss the South American's transnational historical bloc formation and development towards the architecture of peace in South America. The conceptualization of peace in South America has often been characterized as being an "anomaly" in terms of inter-state conflict, due the existence of long periods of peace (here understood as the absence of direct state conflict). In order to understand such configuration of peace, it is used a neogramscian perspective of power formation in terms of cohesion and consensus, which represents the willingness of a dominant class(es) that forms the historical bloc. Thus, the internationalization of such concept it is based on the transnationalization of such dominant class(es) across, in this case, South America states and, consequently, forming a transnational historical bloc. It is argued that the transnational historical bloc has been present among South America countries and has directly influenced the process of peace in the region.

Texto da comunicação apresentada a 54th ISA Annual Convention, San Francisco, EUA 3-6 April 2013 ; Since the end of the Cold war, the international system configuration developed in such way that allowed different approaches concerning the reflection about the construction of peace. Albeit many efforts to transform violent conflicts and construct a sustainable peace, the persistence of violent conflicts throughout the globe indicates that these efforts are, at least, problematic. Consequently, a critical line of thought became more salient across peace studies. In this context, this article aims to problematize the construction of peace from both, a gramscian and foulcauldian perspectives. Hence, we will explore points of convergences and divergences in both theories in order to achieve a critical comprehension of peace. Ultimately, the main goal is to evince that the construction of peace within the international system aims the core's maintenance of hegemony through the biopolitical power, exerted over the periphery.

International relations have always focused on security and conflict studies. These themes are central to understand several factors from geopolitics to world (re)ordering. There is no doubt that since the Second World War, the role played by the United States (US) is crucial to understand such aspects of international life. Furthermore, their acting in Latin America follows the same pattern. In that sense, this article proposes to address the following research question: which changes in the US' foreign policy towards Latin America influenced conflict patterns in the Interamerican system after the Cold War? We intend to demonstrate that shifts on US' foreign policy towards Latin American, from military actions to economic embargos, had an impact over conflict patters in the region after the end of the Cold War. In order to assess the manifold aspects of US-Latin America relations, we explore data on Interamerican conflicts and map 60 years of economic and military conflict in the American continent and systematize conflictive interactions to identify patterns and changes in US-Latin America interplay. We present evidence of a significant change in the kind of conflict, from military to economic, since the end of the Cold War. Our findings indicate a predominance of military interventions during the Cold War, especially as a US response to intrastate wars (revolutions and civil wars), targeting predominantly small Central American and Caribbean countries. After the end of the Cold War, economic sanctions dominated the agenda, with the US targeting mostly Latin America's three largest countries, Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina.

International relations have always focused on security and conflict studies. These themes are central to understand several factors from geopolitics to world (re)ordering. There is no doubt that since the Second World War, the role played by the United States (US) is crucial to understand such aspects of international life. Furthermore, their acting in Latin America follows the same pattern. In that sense, this article proposes to address the following research question: which changes in the US' foreign policy towards Latin America influenced conflict patterns in the Interamerican system after the Cold War? We intend to demonstrate that shifts on US' foreign policy towards Latin American, from military actions to economic embargos, had an impact over conflict patters in the region after the end of the Cold War. In order to assess the manifold aspects of US-Latin America relations, we explore data on Interamerican conflicts and map 60 years of economic and military conflict in the American continent and systematize conflictive interactions to identify patterns and changes in US-Latin America interplay. We present evidence of a significant change in the kind of conflict, from military to economic, since the end of the Cold War. Our findings indicate a predominance of military interventions during the Cold War, especially as a US response to intrastate wars (revolutions and civil wars), targeting predominantly small Central American and Caribbean countries. After the end of the Cold War, economic sanctions dominated the agenda, with the US targeting mostly Latin America's three largest countries, Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina.

There are countless challenges regarding the construction of a certain degree of international security. The existing configuration of the international system has several mechanisms to minimize the recurrence of interstate conflicts, with the Organization of American States (OAS) being the main reference on the continent. In this context, South America stands out for the low rate of interstate conflicts throughout its history. Taking this unique feature into account, this article proposes the following starting question: to what extent does the OAS, in terms of conflict resolution and prevention, play an important role in South America? It is argued that the organization has a limited role regarding the potential for litigation in the region due to its sui generis characteristic of low-intensity intrastate and interstate conflicts. Methodologically, the deductive approach is adopted, based on a more general analysis of the region to understand its particularities in terms of conflicts, and subsequent OAS action in those conflicts. To this end, the historical procedural and case study methods help the article to map the intrastate and interstate conflicts in South America. The qualitative research technique is also used with literature reviews and documentary analysis. In agreement with the objectives proposed in this article, the role of this regional organization was observed more in the prevention than in the resolution of conflicts in the region.