Abstract This article aims to present selected elements of SC's development in the field of International Relations (IR) theory. It underlines the role played by sociology of knowledge and the transformative moment of the end of the Cold War. The main focus of this article is put on the process of mainstreaming SC in IR. This articles presents a summary, reminding one the fundamental premises of SC and their potential in IR and in social sciences in general. It is especially important today, as we face the situation where "everyone writes, but no one reads anymore" (Bok, 2015).
In this article, we reflect on analytical eclecticism as a research approach and apply it to EU-Russia relations. First, we sketch the conceptual contours of theoretical eclecticism in international relations. Next, we consider its explanatory potential, discuss some of the present criticism and conduct a brief exemplary analysis of its use. In the process, we focus on EU-Russia relations using the theoretical perspectives of both liberalism and realism. In this view, the EU's and Russia's decision makers are conceptualized as looking at their mutual relations (and international relations in general) through the lenses of both perspectives. The empirical case is "diversity management" between the EU and Russia including issues of states/territories with limited recognition (Crimea, Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic of Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia).
In this article, we reflect on analytical eclecticism as a research approach and apply it to EU-Russia relations. First, we sketch the conceptual contours of theoretical eclecticism in international relations. Next, we consider its explanatory potential, discuss some of the present criticism and conduct a brief exemplary analysis of its use. In the process, we focus on EU-Russia relations using the theoretical perspectives of both liberalism and realism. In this view, the EU's and Russia's decision makers are conceptualized as looking at their mutual relations (and international relations in general) through the lenses of both perspectives. The empirical case is "diversity management" between the EU and Russia including issues of states/territories with limited recognition (Crimea, Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic of Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia).
Abstract Social constructivism is not among the most popular theoretical approaches used in forecasting in International Relations. The article argues that constructivism suffers from the same limitations as any other paradigm in IR, therefore, there is no reason to exclude this theory from forecasting effort. In this paper, social constructivism is perceived to offer a new conceptual framework for sound and robust projections of the future. The core of our concept is constituted by the term of collective habitus. Habitus is a relatively stable, yet mutable social structure that can enable deliberations about future. It is based on a long-term history study programme of the School of Annales, as we identify long lasting habits-like patterns of behaviours among IR actors.
Abstract Since the democratic transition, Poland-United States relations have been framed by the Polish authorities as a strategic threat-management tool in the securitization process of Poland's geopolitical position, particularly concerning the Russian Federation. We analyse the process of securitization regarding Poland-US relations through latent topic modelling of Polish parliamentary speeches in the years 1991–2017. We demonstrate that the discourse on Polish-US relations is heavily dominated by security topics, narrowly understood as military security. Furthermore, even when economic issues are discussed, they are frequently linked to military operations. Based on Floyd's (2011, 2019) model of the moral rightness of securitization, we argue that the close relationship between securitizing moves (debates on Poland-US relations) and security practices (security events) suggests the basic sincerity of the securitizing actor, while the historical context reflected in the Polish collective memory strongly influences the audience's frame of reference and strengthens the power of the securitizing actor. However, although the case fulfils Floyd's (2019) criteria of morally right securitization, we have shown a historical disparity between the scope of securitizing moves with security practices and the existing level of threat. This demonstrates that the securitizing agent has been abusing securitization by exceeding the 'least harmful option', particularly due to the large asymmetry of power of the participants in the relationship, the securitization process stretched over a long period and the threat severity varying over time.
For the very first time in EU history, the 2014 EP elections provided citizens with the opportunity to influence the nomination of the Commission President by casting a vote for the main Europarties' 'lead candidates'. By subjecting the position of the Commission President to an open political contest, many experts have formulated the expectation that heightened political competition would strengthen the weak electoral connection between EU citizens and EU legislators, which some consider a root cause for the EU's lack of public support. In particular, this contest was on display in the so-called 'Eurovision Debate', a televised debate between the main contenders for the Commission President broadcasted live across Europe. Drawing on a quasi-experimental study conducted in 24 EU countries, we find that debate exposure led to increased cognitive and political involvement and EU support among young citizens. Unfortunately, the debate has only reached a very small audience. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
