In this chapter, we trace the emergence of institutional approaches in IR theory, outline three important areas of research on international institutions, and suggest promising directions for future research. The review demonstrates that rational choice institutionalism, historical institutionalism, and normative institutionalism, as developed in the study of domestic institutions, have constituted sources of inspiration in IR theory. At the same time, the relative absence of formal institutions in the international realm has encouraged IR scholars to theorize more subtle institutional forms and influences, with general implications for institutional analysis in political science.
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 ...
This book of ten original essays provides a showcase of currently diverse theoretical agendas in the field of international relations. Contributors address the theoretical analysis that their perspective brings to the issue of change in global politics. Written for readers with a general interest in and knowledge of world affairs, New Thinking in International Relations Theory can also be assigned in international relations theory courses.The volume begins with an essay on the classical tradition at the end of the Cold War. Essays explore work outside the mainstream, such as Jean Bethke Elshtain on feminist theory and James Der Derian on postmodern theory as well as those developing theoretical advances within traditional realms from James DeNardo's formal modeling to the more descriptive analyses of Miles Kahler and Steve Weber. Other essays include Matthew Evangelista on domestics structure, Daniel Deudney on naturalist and geopolitical theory, and Joseph Grieco on international structuralist theory. ; https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/books/1241/thumbnail.jpg
From the introduction: Governments rely heavily on taxes to fund their operations. If the business transactions subject to tax are entirely domestic, a country wields considerable power to implement a tax system and collect the designated taxes. But if the transactions cross national borders, who taxes them? Whose rules apply? And, perhaps most important, what happens when countries disagree? Who "prevails" and why? These are serious, critical, and relevant questions for which there are few answers. The dominant focus of international tax literature has been an analysis of substantive tax law and its implications. Receiving much less attention is how countries have come to agree on particular tax rules and practices-the international relations of international tax.
In: Michelsen , N 2020 , ' What is a minor international theory? On the limits of 'Critical International Relations' ' , Journal of International Political Theory , vol. 0 , no. 0 , pp. 0 . https://doi.org/10.1177/1755088220956680
This article argues that 'Critical International Relations,' often counterpoised to 'mainstream IR,' has come to function as a major theoretical category in its own right. It argues that critique involves 'minor theorising,' defined as the practice of disturbing settled theoretical assumptions in the discipline. The article examines the role and significance of 'minor theories' in the context of ongoing debates about Critical IR. It argues that critique is defined by context, and is politically and ethically ambiguous. The article concludes that the scope for critique could be advanced if the terms 'Critical IR' and 'Critical IR Scholar' are dropped from scholarly parlance.
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
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.
The article of record as published may be located at http://www.jstor.org/stable/2625234 ; The recently published lectures by Martin Wight (1913-72) on the history thought regarding international politics are of exceptional importance. points out, the lectures answer a number of questions about what Wight 'traditions' and what his own position was with regard to their validity. analysis and organizing framework capture and clarify a complex historical greater justice and lucidity than many others that have been proposed. lectures place in perspective what has been the most indisputable criticism approach-his 'Eurocentrism' and neglect of non-Western traditions-opportunitiesforfurther research building on these foundations.
A Teoria de Rajamandala e as Relações Internacionais da Índia. Nas relações internacionais contemporâneas a Índia é vista como uma das maiores potências. A ascensão da Índia como um ator-chave no panorama global assenta na sua postura política internacional, no seu crescente poder económico, numa influência cultural dinâmica e numa máquina militar potente. Com base nestes recursos o país vê-se a si próprio como um líder natural à escala global, existindo uma cuidada e cultivada visão estratégica que pauta esta postura expansionista. Sendo este o caso, como se pode identificar esta visão? Quais são os componentes-chave desta estratégia? Argumenta-se que existe uma moldura política teórica autóctone e específica que remonta a mais de dois mil anos, a qual resistiu ao passar do tempo, constituindo a base das relações internacionais contemporâneas da Índia ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
It is my purpose to show that radical humanist and feminist theorising have much to offer each other. Central to this article's thesis is the oligarchic structure of international relations; that is, a small, oligarchic clique of states exercising power in its own interests to the detriment of the overwhelming majority of the world's population. The core position and borders of radical humanist theorising are examined, along with an assessment of some of the major the theoretical divergences between radical humanist and feminist theorising. Areas for theoretical alliance are also located which indicate the necessity of an inter-disciplinary approach that takes into account Third World liberation and the Green movement. A review of world government literature is noted, along with a review of contemporary examples of mainstream International Relations publications - which continue to avoid the feminist standpoint, or relegate feminism to a subsidiary position – and the faulty theoretical positions of Anthony Giddens and the pro-polyarchy perspective. The conclusion considers the benefits of cross-theoretical dialogue between feminist theory and radical humanist theory.
The book is written for active learners - those keen on cutting their own path through the complex and at times hardly comprehensible world of THEORY in International Relations. To aid this process as much as possible, this book employs the didactical and methodical concept of integrating teaching and self-study. The criteria for structured learning about IR theory will be derived from an extensive discussion of the questions and problems of philosophy of science (Part 1). Theory of IR refers to the scientific study of IR and covers all of the following subtopics: the role and status of theory in the academic discipline of IR; the understanding of IR as a science and what a "scientific" theory is; the different assumptions upon which theory building in IR is based; the different types of theoretical constructions and models of explanations found at the heart of particular theories.
What are the general costs associated with a U.S. shift toward unilateralism? According to the overwhelming majority of international relations (IR) scholars, the costs are very high. We evaluate the key arguments that underlie this assessment, namely that increased U.S. unilateralism will: (1) spur the formation of a coalition to check U.S. power; (2) reduce efficiency gains through lost opportunities for institutionalized cooperation; and (3) undermine the legitimacy of the American-led international order. We conclude that the theoretical arguments that IR scholars advance do not show that a shift toward unilateralism necessarily has high costs. Our analysis reveals the need to, first, distinguish clearly between criticisms of unilateral policies based on procedure and those based on substance and, second, to recognize the weakness of current procedural arguments.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: War is the major problem facing mankind as no other societal affliction can match it in terms of human suffering and loss of life. Throughout recorded history theorists have attempted to formulate a method of preventing wars but none have succeeded. John G. Stoessinger, Professor of Political Science at Hunter College, City University of New York, has formulated a theory of peacekeeping that shows some promise for success. The purpose of this paper is to examine Stoessinger's theory in order to determine its distinctiveness, originality, and utility. METHODS: Research has combined comparative and case study methods with the comparative approach being utilized a great majority of the time. Findings have been presented in the traditional narrative style favored in the discipline of international relations. Several of Stoessinger's books were compared in order to find the origins and content of his theory. In addition, Stoessinger's theory was compared to the work of other theorists in order to discover the originality and distinctiveness of Stoessinger's work. Several of Stoessinger's own case studies were partially restructured to illustrate the utility of his peacekeeping theory. Theoretical points of reference were used to define Stoessinger's approach and contribution to the discipline. Again, these reference points and Stoessinger's theory were subjected to the comparative method of analysis. FINDINGS: This thesis concluded that Stoessinger combined the traditional and behavioral approaches to write a mid-range theory of international relations. His peacekeeping theory is based on perception and therefore lies within the psychological realm - an area which has not yet been popularized by the discipline. Stoessinger's theory was found to be distinctive and original. It was discovered that Stoessinger's propositions have not had much impact on the discipline with possible reasons for the unpopularity of his theory being his personal life problems, matters of style, and the psychological aspect of his theory. Final conclusions pointed out that Stoessinger's theory may give partial solutions to the problem of war.
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.
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.