Suchergebnisse

This book argues against the traditional understanding of international relations through the study of ideology and introduces four new major paradigms in the study of international relations theory: Marxian, mass society, community building, and rational choice

With a view to providing contextual background for the Special Issue, this opening article analyses several dimensions of 'The end of International Relations theory?' It opens with a consideration of the status of different types of theory. Thereafter, we look at the proliferation of theories that has taken place since the emergence of the third/fourth debate. The coexistence and competition between an ever-greater number of theories begs the question: what kind of theoretical pluralism should IR scholars embrace? We offer a particular account of theoretical engagement that is preferable to the alternatives currently being practised: integrative pluralism. The article ends on a cautiously optimistic note: given the disciplinary competition that now exists in relation to explaining and understanding global social forces, International Relations may find resilience because it has become theory-led, theory-literate and theory-concerned.

"Universals and Particulars in International Relations Theory" published on by Oxford University Press.

"The Practice Turn in International Relations Theory" published on by Oxford University Press.

The article seeks to do an audit of the state of International Relations theory (IRT) in India. It examines three facets of IRT in this connection. The first relates to the possibility of a tradition of thinking on issues of universal theoretical significance. The second pertains to an exploration of scholarly reflection on an important principle of Indian foreign policy, namely, non-alignment and the limits of theorizing it. The final facet examines the concerns that inform theorization by Indian scholars since the 1990s. In regard to the first facet, the article argues that there exists an Indian tradition of thinking on issues of order, justice and cosmopolitanism, even though it may not have been expressed in the language of IRT. With regard to non-alignment, the article argues that while it did not result in broader theoretical formulations, it raised a number of first order issues for further theorizing. Finally, it suggests that recent IRT invocations by Indian scholars reflect a more receptive conjuncture for such work, both in terms of India's own changing stature in the world system as well as an acknowledgement of more eclectic methods and possibilities in the broader world of the social sciences.

One of the achievements of the reflectivist turn in international relations theory in the late 20th century was the attention given to the role of discourse and other ideational factors in international politics. In recent years, however, approaches critical of the discursive emphasis in international studies have emerged, seeking to restore the significance of non-discursive aspects of international relations such as geography, technology, and the non-human. This article offers a perspective on the development of international relations theory from the standpoint of the debate between materialism and idealism. Within this framework, it provides a brief overview of the historical evolution of international relations theory and subsequently delves into a detailed analysis of three strands of the new wave of materialist theorizing in the field - critical realism, new materialism, and neoclassical geopolitics. The article suggests considering the new materialist wave as, on the whole, a positive development, but also points out the necessity of taking into account the risk of "exiling" the human element from international relations research as such concepts proliferate. The possibility of collaboration between reflecivists and post-reflecivists, as well as between idealists and materialists in general, is underlined for the comprehensive study of contemporary international realities.

Explores potential of pragmatism as an alley of inquiry in IR studies; 10 articles. Contents: The pragmatism of global and European governance: emerging forms of the political "beyond Westphalia", by Mathias Albert and Tanja Kopp-Malek; Pragmatic solidarism and the dilemmas of humanitarian intervention, by Alex J. Bellamy; How to make a social science practical: pragmatism, critical social science and multiperspectival theory, by James Bohman; Deweyan pragmatism and post-positivist school science in IR, by Molly Cochran; Pragmatism's boundaries, by Matthew Festenstein; Pragmatic constructionism and the study of international institutions, by Peter M. Haas and Ernst B. Haas; On the historical imagination of international relations: the case for a "Deweyan reconstruction", by Jonathan B. Isacoff; Returning practice to the linguistic turn: the case of diplomacy, by Iver B. Neumann; Re-orienting international relations: on pragmatism, pluralism and practical reasoning, by David Owen; Globalising democracy without a state: weak public, strong public, global constitutionalism, by Hauke Brunkhorst.

International Relations theory emerged in the 1930's with the triumph of realism over utopianism, a triumph that created a discourse that has been unable to make a substantial contribution to the literature on international distributive justice which has burgeoned since the mid-1970's. The emergence of neorealist and neoliberal International Relations theory in the 1970's and 1980's made little difference; However, this consensus is now crumbling and a new body of International Relations theory, focusing on bounded communities and the ethics of inclusion and exclusion is emerging. This new work is more in tune with the concerns of political theory – although major differences remain.

Africa has been noticeably absent in international relations theory. This new collection of essays by contemporary Africanists convincingly demonstrates the importance of the continent to every theoretical approach in international relations. This collection breaks new ground in how we think about both international relations and Africa, re-examining such foundational concepts as sovereignty, the state, and power; critically investigating the salience of realism, neo-liberalism, liberalism in Africa, and providing new thinking about regionalism, security and identity.

The article seeks to trace the development of International Relations Theory (IRT) in China since 1978. Based on the data collected from five major International Relations (IR) journals published in China as well as a series of translated Western classics and important IRT works by Chinese scholars, the article concludes that two parallel processes are at work in China over the last thirty years. One is a tenacious learning process aimed at knowledge acquirement and generation. It is primarily a process of learning from the West, especially the US, through which IR has developed as an independent academic discipline in China. The resulting triangular competition for influence among the three imported schools of IRT, that is, Realism, Liberalism and Constructivism coincides with the internal debates on China's rise and integration into the international community. The other is a process of developing a Chinese school of IRT. Dissatisfied with the dominance of Western theoretical discourse in the Chinese context, scholars in China have been trying to bring Chinese thoughts back in and establish a distinctly Chinese perspective on IRT.