Suchergebnisse

1. Zum Ewigen Frieden 9. - 2. Die fragmentarische Rezeption Kants in der Theoriendebatte der Internationalen Beziehungen 19. - 3. Zu den Prinzipien von Kants Theorie des Friedens 39. - 4. Vom Realismus zum (Neo-)Institutionalismus: Kants Entwurf als "Complexio Oppositorum" 79. - 5. Kant heute 169

The overall objective of the dissertation is to analyze the interaction of national development in developing societies and the world political economy. It is an attempt to challenge the bidden selectivity of present day IR by going beyond the partial explanations of the bits and pieces of the whole international system and at the same time uncover claims of scientific "objectivity" and "natura) laws" in human nature. It is also challenging the mainstream discourse of IR, which denotes that development has been consigned to the realm oflow pol i tics, except when the international order, as it has been constructed, is threatened. The objective then is to "connect the dots" by providing an overall theoretical framework for the concepts and empirical material presented in five sections and chapters of this dissertation. This is done by examining competing views of what development and later on international relations means and how they may be intertwined. The idea is not necessarily to reach a unified approach but to investigate the different theories, concepts and methodologies involved in a search for a valid framework, which may give explanatory value to a merger of the two disciplines "Development studies" and "International Relations".

What is the relationship between security and secularization in International Relations? The widespread acceptance of secularism as the paradigmatic framework that underlies the study of world politics has left this question largely unexplored. Yet, the recent challenges to the secularization thesis and the growing attention that is being devoted to questions of religion and secularism in international politics increasingly suggest the importance of undertaking this investigation. This article takes up this task in three main steps. First, it will explore how the limits of a widely accepted but nonetheless problematic account of the emergence of the modern Westphalian nation-state contribute to a dominant underlying assumption in security studies that implicitly associates security with secularization. Second, it will articulate a competing genealogy of security and secularization which suggests that rather than solving the problem of religious insecurity, secularization makes the question of fear and the politics of exceptionalism central to the state-centric project of modernity and its related vision of security. Finally, the article will examine how these elements inform and, most of all, constrain attempts to move beyond the traditional state-centric framework of security. The focus will be on three such attempts: human security, the securitization theory and Ken Booth's critical theory of security. [Reprinted by permission; copyright Sage Publications Ltd. & ECPR-European Consortium for Political Research.]

Sports, in particular the Olympics, have been internationalized or globalized much as other social systems, & can therefore be analyzed as a segment of international relationships that consists of interaction between specialized, primarily transnationally composed & operating participants. Sport is characterized as a relatively independent social system, as can be seen by the generally nationally accepted autonomy of the internal policies. Theoretical & empirical analysis illuminates the changing relationship between the system of sports & international politics. Additionally, the hierarchical structure of the Olympic political system, with the IOC at the top but distinguishable executive, legislative, & judicial elements demonstrates the patrimonial & oligarchic character of the IOC as a global government. L. Kehl