Search results

Examines how the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) was able to convince states to adopt humanitarian rules of war laid out by the first Geneva Convention. Exploration of the theoretical arguments underlying humanitarian principles focuses on their desirability from an individual perspective, as well as the threat they pose to sovereignty & traditional understandings about international politics. A world-cultural argument is used to explain the context in which the Red Cross succeeded, arguing that functional & interest-related explanations are insufficient. War is viewed as an organized cultural institution with changing rules &, since state & personal survival conflict during war, other social/cultural values are needed to motivate soldiers to risk their lives. Cultural models also determine the "right" way to fight, & these rules of war have become increasingly globalized. An overview is presented of the origin, content, & spread of the rules of warfare contained in the Geneva Conventions, maintaining that the worldview & moral code expressed in this early period impacted all subsequent ICRC humanitarian efforts. J. Lindroth

Examines how UNESCO demonstrated to member states the value and utility of science policy bureaucracies.

Most explanations for the creation of new state institutions locate the cause of change in the conditions or characteristics of the states themselves. Some aspect of a state's economic, social, political, or military situation is said to create a functional need for the new bureaucracy which then is taken up by one or more domestic groups who succeed in changing the state apparatus. However, changes in state structure may be prompted not only by changing conditions of individual states but also by socialization and conformance with international norms. In the case of one organizational innovation recently adopted by states across the international system, namely, science policy bureaucracies, indicators of state conditions and functional need for these entities are not correlated with the pattern for their adoption. Instead, adoption was prompted by the activities of an international organization which "taught" states the value of science policy organizations and established the coordination of science as an appropriate, and even a necessary, role for states. This finding lends support to constructivist or reflective theories that treat states as social entities shaped by international social action, as opposed to more conventional treatments of states as autonomous international agents.

Edited by Martha Finnemore and Judith Goldstein, this book asks scholars to reflect on the role power plays in contemporary politics and how a power politics approach is influential today. The arguments made by the authors in the volume speak to one of three themes that run through Krasner's work: state power and hegemony; the relationship between states and markets; and conceptions of the nation state in international politics

Frontmatter -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- 1. Bureaucratizing World Politics -- 2. International Organizations as Bureaucracies -- 3. Expertise and Power at the International Monetary Fund -- 4. Defining Refugees and Voluntary Repatriation at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees -- 5. Genocide and the Peacekeeping Culture at the United Nations -- 6. The Legitimacy of an Expanding Global Bureaucracy -- ABBREVIATIONS -- NOTES -- BIBLIOGRAPHY -- INDEX

Aspiration is an essential component of politics. It articulates goals, affirms identities and values, and structures action at all levels of social life. Yet political scientists have spent little time theorizing aspiration—what it is, how it relates to other concepts, and the kinds of effects it creates. In this article, we develop the concept theoretically and argue that aspiration creates a distinct "aspirational politics" that differs from our international relations models of both norm-driven social activism and interest-driven rational choice. We identify three core features of aspiration that undergird its theoretical utility: lofty goals, change over time, and transformation through imagination. In the hands of skilled political actors, aspiration does essential work in both facilitating agreement and mobilizing social action that create change in the world. However, aspiration also has a dark side and can be manipulated to dodge accountability, postpone action, and serve private, rather than public, goals.