Suchergebnisse

Until the end of the Cold War, it is not an exaggeration to say that only a few theorists of International Relations (IR) or policy-makers engaged in either substantial investigation or articulation of the links between cultural variables like religion and ethnicity on one hand and international affairs on the other. In our article, we argue that this pattern does not do justice to the nature of mainstream IR theories. Although studies are accumulating, how (or whether) religion as a variable can be integrated into mainstream IR thinking still remains in question. We look at three main traditions in IR theory — classical realism, structural realism and neoliberalism — to see how religion can contribute to our understanding of international affairs within those frameworks. We claim that, without stretching the limits of theories or disturbing their intellectual coherence, possibilities for two-way interactions between the frameworks and identity-related variables like religion can be identified.

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- List of Tables -- 1 Introduction and Theory -- 2 German-Russian and German-Soviet Relations Before 1945 -- 3 The Chill of the Cold War, 1945–1987 -- 4 Setting the Stage for Reunification, 1987–1990 -- 5 Reunification and After -- 6 Conclusion -- Appendix: Trade Statistics -- Bibliography -- List of Interviews -- Index

The article is devoted to the discussion of the role of postcolonial/decolonial critique and its contribution to the theory of international relations. Intersecting with multiple disciplines and area studies, the postcolonial/decolonial critique offers a broad view not only on the cultural heritage of colonialism/imperialism as such, but also on the more complex and multifaceted challenges facing international relations – the coloniality of power and geopolitics of knowledge – and conditions of their emergence. Postcolonial/decolonial approaches foster critical engagement with Eurocentric narratives in social sciences, countering teleological or linear representations of modernity. Despite its importance, postcolonial/decolonial thought penetrated the theory of international relations rather late. The two fields of intellectual quest have developed not only separately, but they have often diverged in their very epistemological constitution. Based on a review of an extensive literature, the author explores the links between the production of postcolonial knowledge and the theory of international relations. Thus, the author illuminates the problems of modern political science and international studies, on the one hand, and on the other hand, emphasizes the need to make the theory of IR accessible to a variety of new global perspectives. The formation of integrative approaches in the study of world politics should provide a new consolidation of both political science and international studies and a productive interaction of these areas of knowledge.

As U.S. and coalition forces prepare to draw down troops in Afghanistan, this new report urges Washington to view Pakistan not solely or even principally in the context of U.S.-Afghanistan policy, but rather to reorient the relationship toward Asia. The report outlines a two-pronged approach to future U.S. policy for Pakistan: defend against security threats, and support Pakistan's economic growth and normalized relations with its neighbors. The author recommends that the United States: launch a new diplomatic dialogue with China, India, and Pakistan to reduce prospects for regional tension and violence; sign a trade deal that also encourages trade between India and Pakistan; reallocate assistance in Pakistan to improve trade and transit infrastructure; and integrate Pakistan into East and South Asia policymaking across the State Department, National Security Council, and Department of Defense, and deemphasize the Af-Pak connection