Suchergebnisse

Yüksek Lisans Tezi ; Postkolonyal Uluslararası İlişkiler teorisi kolonyalizmi siyasi, askeri ekonomik, kültürel, kimliksel ve zihinsel bir baskı süreci olarak kabul eder. Postkolonyal Uluslararası İlişkiler teorisi her ne kadar 1980'li yıllarda ortaya çıkmış ve 1990'lı yıllarda gelişmeye başlamış gibi görünse de kökenleri 15. yy sömürge tarihine kadar uzanır. Bu teori dünya tarihini ve Üçüncü Dünya ülkelerinin durumunu ana akım Uluslararası İlişkiler teorilerine eleştirel yaklaşarak ve melezlik gibi farklı kavramları da kullanarak açıklar. Postkolonyal teoriye göre melezlik; bir zamanlar kolonize edilmiş yerli halkın kültürünün Batı kültürünün yanında halen belirsiz bir şekilde var olduğunu gösterir. Melezlik kavramı günümüze dek çok farklı anlamlarda kullanılmıştır. 18. yy. başlarında, kolonyal dönemlerde, melezlik kavramı biyolojik bir anlam içeriyordu ve beyaz ırkın ırkçılık üstünlüğü tavrını haklı çıkarmak ve ırklar arası üremeyi önlemek için "ırkların karışması" ve "kültür birleşimi" anlamı taşıyordu. 19 yy. başlarından sonra, dekolonizasyon dönemiyle birlikte, melezlik kavramı özellikle ABD'de İspanyol asıllı kişiler arasında, yerli ile İspanyol asıllıları birbirinden ayırmak için kullanılarak yeni bir anlam kazandı. Daha sonra ise; 20. yüzyılda, Post-kolonyal ve globalleşme dönemlerinde, melezlik kavramı çoğunluk içerisinde yer alan madun azınlığın uğradığı sosyal ayrımcılığı kastetti. Bu çalışma, Postkolonyal Uluslararası İlişkiler teorisinin günümüze dek tarihsel sürecini ve melezlik kavramının zaman içindeki yeni anlamlarını ele alarak kolonici ve kolonize ülkelerin uluslararası ilişkiler, siyasi, askeri, ekonomik, kültürel, zihinsel ve kimliksel durumunu anlamlandırmayı amaçlar. ; According to the Postcolonial International Relations theory; colonialism is a political, military, economical, cultural, identity and mental period of domination. Although Postcolonial International Relations theory was born in 1980s and started to develop in the 1990s, it's roots go back to the 15th century of ...

Berbagai diskusi politik dewasa ini telah membangkitkan kembali sebuah konsep "klasik" dalam teori Hubungan Internasional (HI), yaitu "kepentingan nasional". Konsep ini menjadi kata kunci paling penting bagi penganut pendekatan realisme yang memang sangat percaya pada "kedaulatan negara" sebagai satu-satunya aktor/entitas dalam HI. Secara lebih luas, istilah "kepentingan nasional" juga terutama muncul dalam dokumen-dokumen kebijakan di berbagai kementrian, terutama Kementrian Luar Negeri dan Kementrian Pertahanan, serta menjadi salah satu doktrin yang memandu pelaksanaan politik luar negeri di banyak negara.Namun, secara konseptual istilah ini juga menyisakan pertanyaan penting: apa yang dimaksud dengan "kepentingan nasional" ini? Kendati sering sekali didiskusikan dalam teori HI kontemporer, pada dasarnya istilah ini masih dengan serius diperdebatkan.

This article examines the BRICS phenomenon through the prism of several International Relations theories. Particularly, power transition theory, soft power and peaceful coexistence concepts, the theory of "global regionalism" and status theories are reviewed. Each of them suggests its own theoretical interpretation of the BRICS phenomenon, as well as its own vision of this group's role in world politics and economy. It is safe to assume that despite limitations of these theories each of them has some explanatory power. Being used together they can be helpful for studying - in an interdisciplinary way - a complex phenomenon, such as the BRICS. A number of modern theories hold that, along with the pursuit of purely material and pragmatic interests, the BRICS countries actively use this integration association to strengthen their positions in the world arena and elevate their international status. It should be noted that the BRICS was rather successful in presenting itself as a new model of world order which is a serious alternative to the existing one dominated by the West. It is based on the principles of cooperation, mutual respect and balance of interests, rather than dictate, discrimination, hierarchy and balance of power. It is too early to ascertain that a principally new type of an international institution was born within the BRICS format. However, there is no doubt that some positive experience has already been accumulated by this forum, and that this grouping has some good prospects for the future. For this reason, it will remain of considerable interest for International Relations theory. Keywords: BRICS, International Relations Theory, alternative world order

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the considerable influence that Michel Foucault has had on International Relations theory. To do this, I will present a selection of important contributions to the discipline that have been inspired by his work. Firstly, I will show that the critique of rationalist and scientific paradigms in International Relations was in great part led by commentators who displayed strong foucaultian inspirations. Second, I will introduce a series of scholars who have made cogent uses of discourse analysis, which Foucault developed in philosophical and genealogical works. Lastly, I discuss the uses and interpretations of governmentality, biopolitics and sovereign power in the analysis of emerging networks of power at the international level. In this article, my central argument is that the application of Foucault's thought to International Relations has given way to a rich and ever-evolving research program and has had considerable impact on the opening and redefinition of the discipline.

A headline of the Venezuelean daily El Nacionalista, published June 16, 2008, read: 'Venezuela se negó a seguir de rodillas ante las pretensiones del gobierno norteamericano'. A few weeks before, on May 8, president Hugo Chávez himself had said that Venezuela 'would not watch crossed-armed' ('Venezuela no se quedará de brazos cruzados') while Bolivia was driven into territorial desintegration by imperialist forces. The image of Venezuela with her arms crossed is one of slovenliness and negligence, whilst the image of it on its knees is humiliating. They both generate outrage and the need to set things 'right'. This is only an example of the often unnoticed practical and theoretical consequences of the anthropomorphic language we all use when referring to states in terms of (for example) 'weak' and 'strong' actors who 'suffer', are 'honored', are 'humiliated', have 'pride' and aspire to 'glory'. This language obscures the fact that, oftentimes, when a weak state challenges a strong one at a great cost to itself, we are not witnessing an epic of courage (as might be the case when a weak individual challenges a strong one), but rather the sacrifice of the interests, welfare and sometimes even the lives of multitudes of poor people, to the vanity of their elite. The very fact that this is being obscured biases the value structure of international relations theory, which is not only not value-free, but often has totalitarian values unintendedly built into it.

This paper addresses the constitutional entrenchment of foreign policy preferences, or "world views", from the vantage point of International Relations theory. Empirically, norms that sketch out certain visions of global governance have become a popular feature of constitutional design. The paper expounds both their potential, as well as pitfalls to avoid, with a particular focus on Constructivist scholarship. In terms of their merits, they can serve as evidence of a "normative basis" for foreign policy and as parameters for legitimacy. Furthermore, they represent both evidence of, and fuel for, processes of socialization in foreign policy. However, Constructivists tempted to draw on such constitutional worldviews should heed three main caveats. Firstly, while the constitution is supreme in the legal realm, it is only one of many possible expressions of normative preferences from a political science perspective. Secondly, they should avoid confusion between domestic constitutional standards and universal ones. Thirdly, they should be aware of the problematic of the "dead hand of the past", i.e., while constitutional entrenchment may lend norms particular gravitas, it also makes them prone to become out-dated. By staying clear of these pitfalls, Constructivist theorists can embrace contemporary constitutions in their quest to elucidate which principles and ideas shape the international order and its maturing legal framework.

UN peace operations have, since their inception, touched on core issues and concepts at the heart of the study ofinternational relations: conflict and cooperation; sovereignty and intervention; norms and norm diffusion; the use and utility of military force; and the changing character of armed conflict. To study UN peacekeeping,therefore, is also to study international politics and, by extension, to engage in debates about the bases for international order and the prospects for international society. Although the scope and scale of UN peace operations have evolved over time, the study of UN operations needs to factor in not just discontinuities but also important elements of continuity in the history and practice of UN peacekeeping. The experience of UN operations is rich, diverse and multi-layered. The investigation and deeper understanding of that experience are certain to benefit – as the present volume demonstrates – from the application of different theoretical lenses and a range of methodological tools.

The Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) represents an institutionalized attempt by European Union Member States to respond to the security challenges they confront. This paper discusses the evolution of this policy through the lens of political integration and international relations theories. The analysis integrates both the supranational and the national level, and demonstrates that European institutions have extended their privileges and sphere of influence with increasing organizational mandates. At the same time, participation by various levels in the creation of European security policies has evolved, and the inter-governmental level is often recognized as dominant. However, the question remains open whether this evolution of policy might be properly explained by several influential political theories that have shaped the European integration and security architecture in recent decades. Aspects of the CSDP institutional setting (its creation, goals and role) and the explanation of why security and defense policy is a complex dilemma of the integration process are discussed.

Digitised version produced by the EUI Library and made available online in 2020.

The security community concept generally inhabits a rather small niche in the study of International Relations, as the logic of community fundamentally challenges the prevailing logic of anarchy. In this article, it is argued both on ontological and theoretical grounds that the concept's intellectual heritage and depth transcends the boundaries of existing theories. In this sense, the concept of security community serves as a via media by linking different strands of International Relations theory together and by bridging various theoretical gaps. This argument will be developed in two steps. Firstly, it will be shown that the security community framework developed by Karl W Deutsch is deeply rooted in International Political Theory without belonging to one particular branch. By locating the concept in International Political Theory, an exercise that has been neglected by the security community literature; it will be secondly demonstrated that the concept of security community takes the middle ground between specific strands of International Relations theory, as these strands are ultimately based on concepts of moral philosophy.

The goal of this paper is examine the recent literature on the intersection between philosophical pragmatism and International Relations (IR), including IR theory and IR research methodology. One of the obstacles to motivating pragmatist IR theories and research methodologies, I contend, is the difficulty of defining pragmatism, particularly whether there is a need for a more generic definition of pragmatism or one narrowly tailored to the goals of IR theorists and researchers. Even though philosophical pragmatism does not fit nicely into any of the traditional theoretic frameworks in International Relations, I sketch of a philosophically-inspired pragmatist IR theory based on the writings of John Dewey and Richard Rorty. On the topic of IR research methodology, I show how the cross-pollination of philosophical pragmatism and IR research methods has benefited immensely from the contributions of several leading IR pragmatists, and there are hopeful signs that the relationship can be further enriched. ; Este artículo examina la literatura reciente sobre la intersección entre pragmatismo filosófico y relaciones internacionales (RI), incluyendo la teoría y la metodología de investigación de las RI. Se sostiene que uno de los obstáculos que motivan las teorías y metodologías pragmatistas de las RI es la dificultad de definir el pragmatismo, en particular si existe la necesidad de una definición más genérica de pragmatismo, o una más específica que se vincule con las metas de teóricos e investigadores de las relaciones internacionales. Aunque el pragmatismo filosófico no se ajusta fácilmente a ninguno de los marcos teóricos tradicionales en RI, aquí esbozo una teoría pragmatista de las RI que se inspira en los trabajos de John Dewey y Richard Rorty. Sobre la metodología de las RI, señalo de qué manera la combinación del pragmatismo filosófico y los métodos de investigación en RI se han beneficiado enormemente de las contribuciones de algunos pragmatistas líderes de las RI y que hay signos de esperanza en que dicha relación puede enriquecerse posteriormente.

Abstract I propose to consider the question, in what way is theology fundamental to the understanding of IR theory? In light of the resurgence of religious interest in global affairs revealing a disciplinary incapacity within IR to deal with the theo-political aspect of its historicity, this thesis brings into focus the hidden dimension of theology in IR theory to argue that there are theological underpinnings in the relationship between IR theory and international history within the discursive history of IR. My argument presupposes that IR and more so International Political Theology is an aesthetic and eschatological endeavour that operates in meta-Christian structures within which a continuing hierarchy privileges the theological over the political representative of the totalising nature of theology. The revival of metaphysics and the Messianic turn in political thought to an extent in response to the 'End of History' thesis marked the renewal of interest in temporal matters that reopened the 'bureau of eschatology.' Taking account of the inherently eschatological nature of theology the aim of this thesis to discern the theme of eschatology in the intellectual history of IR. If IR is about the predicament of history (history is a predicament because it is suspended and not yet accomplished) and if theology is about eschatology then the primary argument of this thesis is that theology is so fundamental to IR theory because IR's object of study (order, a privileged future or utopia) is theology's ultimate point of reference (the katechon and eschatology). The focus of the research into the theological underpinnings centres on an interpretation of the writings of Henri Bergson, Arnold Toynbee and Martin Wight with the aim of tracing and revealing the eschatological dimension embedded in their scholarship. My original contribution to scholarship is to classify three distinct eschatological types gnostic, millenarian and dialectical and to bring these together in a typology of eschatology. The interpretations ...

The category of a national interest is one of the most popular notions used in international relations. It has a polysemic character and is differently interpreted by various scientific perspectives. The purpose of this article is to provide a brief analysis of selected approaches of the theory of international relations to defining interests and correlating the interpretations of national interests of the Russian Federation performed on their bases. The choice of case study concerning the foreign policy of the Russian Federation is not accidental because in countries aspiring to gain world power the concept of national interest is raised while explaining the motives of decisions taken by their leaders exceptionally often. In this article, Russia's interests will be discussed in reference to the annexation of the Crimea and Russia's actions towards Ukraine. Those events vividly show the specificity of defining the national interests, based on one hand on the pursue to being a powerhouse and understanding the interests in the category of power and, on the other hand, resulting from the political identity of Russian elites. As a result, an assessment of the scientific utility of selected theoretical paradigms and their use in the analyses of Russia's foreign policy will be outlined.

The category of a national interest is one of the most popular notions used in international relations. It has a polysemic character and is differently interpreted by various scientific perspectives. The purpose of this article is to provide a brief analysis of selected approaches of the theory of international relations to defining interests and correlating the interpretations of national interests of the Russian Federation performed on their bases. The choice of case study concerning the foreign policy of the Russian Federation is not accidental because in countries aspiring to gain world power the concept of national interest is raised while explaining the motives of decisions taken by their leaders exceptionally often. In this article, Russia's interests will be discussed in reference to the annexation of the Crimea and Russia's actions towards Ukraine. Those events vividly show the specificity of defining the national interests, based on one hand on the pursue to being a powerhouse and understanding the interests in the category of power and, on the other hand, resulting from the political identity of Russian elites. As a result, an assessment of the scientific utility of selected theoretical paradigms and their use in the analyses of Russia's foreign policy will be outlined. ; This article has been written within a research program financed by National Science Centre granted based on the decision number DEC-2011/03/N/HS5/00986.

The category of a national interest is one of the most popular notions used in international relations. It has a polysemic character and is differently interpreted by various scientific perspectives. The purpose of this article is to provide a brief analysis of selected approaches of the theory of international relations to defining interests and correlating the interpretations of national interests of the Russian Federation performed on their bases. The choice of case study concerning the foreign policy of the Russian Federation is not accidental because in countries aspiring to gain world power the concept of national interest is raised while explaining the motives of decisions taken by their leaders exceptionally often. In this article, Russia's interests will be discussed in reference to the annexation of the Crimea and Russia's actions towards Ukraine. Those events vividly show the specificity of defining the national interests, based on one hand on the pursue to being a powerhouse and understanding the interests in the category of power and, on the other hand, resulting from the political identity of Russian elites. As a result, an assessment of the scientific utility of selected theoretical paradigms and their use in the analyses of Russia's foreign policy will be outlined. ; This article has been written within a research program financed by National Science Centre granted based on the decision number DEC-2011/03/N/HS5/00986.