Search results

In International Relations (IR), as in other social science disciplines, the desire to be current and progressive is both powerful and understandable. Indeed IR as a discipline needs to continually evolve and adapt if it is to be relevant. Yet this natural quest should also include building bridges, where context, perspective and a melding of key past scholarship and current promising endeavors produce true analytical insights. A mere rush to the future where past achievements are ignored or walled off, or where methodology is more about ends than means could undermine the vast potential of an across-the-field discipline that should understand and respect the long arc of history and scholarship. It should behoove us then to be inclusive while skeptical, and appreciate both the benefits and limits of the various approaches whether it is classical realism, neo-realism, liberalism, constructivism or the multiple modernist and post-modernist scholarly endeavors. And throughout we would also benefit from a certain modesty in our scholarly claims as we acknowledge the disparity between our aspirations and achievements.

Everywhere* in the world today, we see forces defying each other, preparing to invade other countries as well as organizing resistance to invasion. Is it possible that out of this turmoil of interests, emotions, opinions, impressions, a constructive and coherent international life can emerge? Are we simply at the mercy of events and of conditioned reflexes, or is it possible that a constructive foreign policy can be conceived by rational thought and pursued consistently in the light of reason?

Lobbying is an integral part of contemporary international processes. Globalization, spread of market relations and transnational links, liberalization of national and supranational governance increased the role of interest groups in international relations. However, interest groups activities at the global level are still largely a terra incognita for international relations theory and international law which requires a more comprehensive analysis. The main goal of the article is to fill the gaps in modern IR theory as well as in theories of lobbying and interest groups by systematization of lobbying regulation experience in international and transnational spheres. Even though single approach towards formalization of international lobbying is hardly feasible, systematization of current global practices should facilitate better understanding of the nature of interest groups activity in international and transnational spheres, of potential and limits for its regulation both in sovereign states and international organizations. The article analyzes separate regulatory regimes aimed at formalizing lobbying in international and transnational spheres. There are two types of regimes: those existing on supranational level that set rules of interaction between interest groups and international organizations; those that regulate interactions of foreign interest groups and sovereign states. Analysis has demonstrated that supranational and national authorities have different approaches towards regulating their interactions with transnational interest groups. Moreover, difference exists not only between these two levels but within levels. I study supranational regulation with the cases of the European Union and the United Nations. The EU is an example of the most inclusive regulatory regime within the international organization. It technically covers all types of interest groups that wish to lobby EU officials. The UN takes a different approach – it officially regulates interactions only with international non-governmental organizations (INGOs). However, real interests behind INGOs include not only public interests but also business groups. There is an unfolding discussion within the UN over what should be the right approach towards regulating business interests. Various UN bodies have varying opinions on the issue that results in existence of various sub-regimes in the organization. The analysis of foreign lobbying regulation regimes in sovereign states has demonstrated that their development is connected mainly to political motivations of national authorities who wish to limit political and information influence by foreign interest groups while leaving economic ties and interaction with foreign business groups relatively immune to such regulation.

"Australia on the World Stage: History, Politics, and International Relations offers a fresh examination of Australia's past and present. From the complex interactions of First Nations to modern international relations with significant partners and allies, it examines the forces which have influenced the place now called Australia both historically and today. It is a unique history told in two parts. The first half of the book examines the way Australia acted on the world stage both before and after British colonisation. It outlines the evolution of Australia's relationship with the United Kingdom, first as colonies, then a dominion, and finally as an independent nation. It finishes with a First Nations perspective on foreign relations. The second half of the book provides a wide-ranging history of Australia's dealings with major powers the United States and China, as well as its relationships with New Zealand and the Pacific Islands, Indonesia, and Japan, Antarctica and in the United Nations. Written by leading and emerging researchers in their fields, this book encourages the reader to consider Australia's performance on the world stage over the longue durée, well before the word 'Australia' was ever dreamt up. This interdisciplinary work challenges lazy stereotypes that see Australia's international history as fixed and uncontested. In revisiting Australia's foreign relations, this work also asks the reader to consider its future directions"--