Alfred Zimmern’s Early Political Thought II: Liberalism, Burke and The Greek Commonwealth

This article discusses the development of Soviet/Russian international relations (IR) studies starting from the end of Second World War until the present. It reveals that Soviet IR studies were based on a mixture of realism and Marxism–Leninism, with realism predominating. It was a very important feature of the Soviet understanding of IR, and it continues to have a strong influence even now on both the study and practice of IR. The author then analyses barriers to the formation of a national school in IR in the Soviet Union. The contemporary state of Russian IR studies is also discussed. The article demonstrates how political changes in the country led to a transformation of Russian IR studies (with the emergence of new IR institutions, new journals, and new universities in and outside Moscow). Influences on Russian IR studies from different national schools (American, British, and French) are also touched upon.

This is the first of two articles analysing the intellectual formation of Alfred Zimmern, a leading figure in the study of International Relations in the first half of the twentieth century. Drawing on many archival sources, it argues against claims in recent scholarship that Zimmern was strongly influenced by the Idealism popular at Oxford at the time he read Literae Humaniores. Instead, it sets Zimmern’s concerns in the context of the emerging social sciences and argues that it was the study of Ancient History rather than Philosophy that shaped his early internationalist thought. The article as a whole studies disciplinary methodology in the writing of intellectual history.

This article investigates and explains the development of International Relations studies (IRS) in China, Japan, and India. Beginning in early 1980s IRS experienced exponential growth in China and is becoming a separate discipline in that country. Despite early starts, IRS in Japan and India is still an appendage in other disciplinary departments, programs, and centers although growing interest is discernible in both countries. Continued rise of Asian powers along with their growing roles and responsibilities in constructing and managing regional and global orders is likely sustain and increase interest in IRS in these countries and more generally in Asia. Distinctive trajectories have characterized the development of IRS in China, Japan, and India. Distinctiveness is evident in master narratives and intellectual predispositions that have shaped research and teaching of IR in all three countries. The distinct IRS trajectories are explained by the national and international context of these countries as well as the extensiveness of state domination of their public spheres. Alterations in national circumstances and objectives along with changes in the international position explain the master narratives that have focused the efforts of IR research communities. Extensiveness of state domination and government support, respectively, explain intellectual predispositions and institutional opportunities for the development of IRS. IRS in Asia has had a

It is time for International Relations (IR) to join the relational revolution afoot in the natural and social sciences. To do so, more careful reflection is needed on cosmological assumptions in the sciences and also in the study and practice of international relations. In particular it is argued here that we need to pay careful attention to whether and how we think ‘relationally’. Building a conversation between relational cosmology, developed in the natural sciences, and critical social theory, this book seeks to develop a new perspective on how to think relationally in and around the study of IR. This book asks: What kind of cosmological background assumptions do we make as we tackle international relations today and where do our assumptions (about states, individuals or the international) come from? And can we reorient our cosmological imaginations towards more relational understandings of the universe and what would this mean for the study and practice of international politics? The book argues that we live in a world without ‘things’, a world of processes and relations. It also suggests that we live in relations which exceed the boundaries of the human and the social, in planetary relations with plants and animals. Rethinking conceptual premises of IR, Kurki points towards a ‘planetary politics’ perspective within which we can reimagine IR as a field of study and also political practices, including the future of democracy.

The development of the study of International Relations in Japan is best understood in historical perspective. Prior to 1945 the study of International Relations was conceived as an amalgamation of Law, History and Economics in the international arena.1 It is indicative of this conception of the study of international relations that one of the oldest existing journals for the study of International Relations, Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi (Journal of International Law and Diplomacy), appeared as early as 1902. At its inception, the study of International Relations in Japan was largely understood as Diplomatic History and International Law. These two fields of study were deemed essential for the appropriate handling of International Relations as practised by the Western powers. After all, the gunboat diplomacy of the Western powers in the mid-nineteenth century forced a long-secluded Japan to open its doors. Then, as Japan emerged as a military power and acquired colonial possessions, military studies and colonial studies were added to the field. From this, it is clear that the study of International Relations was shaped by the practical needs of the newly modernising state in East Asia. In other words, the study of International Relations in Japan was a reflection of raison d’etat.

The study of international relations usually occurs in a geographic vacuum. Little attention is given to the spatial context, both local and regional, in which interstate relations take place. A methodology for situating interstate relations in context is proposed. It evaluates the separate effects of national attributes, spatial dependence or neighbor effect, and regional heterogeneity on relations among states. Using the example of African interstate cooperation and conflict between 1966 and 1978, geographic context is identified as a strongly local (first‐order neightbor) phenomenon by the use of an index of spatial association for dyadic data. Using the methods of spatial econometrics, the levels of conflict and cooperation for 42 African states in the study could be explained with a high degree of accuracy but individual dyadic relationship require more careful specification of attribute and geographic distance models. Both spatial dependence and spatial heterogeneity are strongly present in the African data and future study of African international relations should carefully examine their geographical context.

The inquiry is focused on what the Feminist International Relations (IR) Theory challenge is and how the challenge is articulated? The author tried to identify the “feminist challenge” or the “feminist standpoint in IR” to gain understanding of the much touted ‘feminist challenge’ in IR. Qualitative literature review was adopted, and content analysis of the literature on the subject conducted. The identified papers through internet searches of various websites and content providers in the scholastic literature domain on IR, Feminism and Gender Studies, were selected for use, assessing the validity and trustworthiness of each paper. The identified papers were selected purposively, using the snowball effect by mining the reference pages of the leading papers with appreciable number of citations, until saturation was reached. The feminist standpoint appears to be all about the determination of sheer intellectual discourse or discussion and publications as legitimate feminine voices and position in IR studies by a few good researchers? In actual diplomatic practice, Feminist IR Theory is not universally adopted or applied to international politics and diplomacy. It was or is difficult to identify the results that the Feminist challenge has produced in the conduct of international relations and politics. State realism raised on male masculinity and patriarchal viewpoints and dominance in IR is still the prevailing approach to IR practice. There is a need for a better articulation of the feminist standpoint in IR since it invokes other competing standpoints such as the Masculine Standpoint, Black African Standpoint, African American Standpoint, Chinese Standpoint, etc., due to the need for objectivity, Diversity, Equality and Inclusivity on the world scale. The conclusion suggests that the Feminist Standpoint Theory in IR appears to be an invalid concept or, at best, has limited application in practice in world politics.

Feminist Theory began to gain attention in International Relations (IR) studies in the late 1980s, with women's rights no longer being ignored. Since then, more women have started to openly express their opinions on IR studies. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that Feminism has increased the role that it has to play in the study of IR in the 21st Century. In the first section of the article, there will be a brief explanation of the background and standpoint of Feminism. Then, it will explain the perspective of Feminist Theory from different approaches. In the next section, the role of feminist scholars in IR will be analyzed. Christine Sylvester and Cynthia Enloe are two obvious scholars who have had an influence on IR. Then, this article will analyze the standpoint of Feminism on war and peace issues. In the following section, the Iraq War will be taken into account as a case study. Then, this article will analyze this case through realist, liberal and feminist lenses - to compare the different standpoints of each theory. Moving to the next section, it will discuss why Feminism has not long played a significant role in the study of IR. Then, in the conclusion, it will sum up the feminist role in IR, to establish whether it has played a significant role or not.

Journal Article The Religious Foundations of Internationalism. A Study in International Relations through the Ages Get access 10. The Religious Foundations of Internationalism. A Study in International Relations through the Ages. By Norman Bentwich. 1933. (London: Allen and Unwin. 8vo. 288 pp. 10s. 6d.) Richard Pyke Richard Pyke Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar International Affairs, Volume 13, Issue 4, July-August 1934, Pages 567–568, https://doi.org/10.2307/2603411 Published: 01 July 1934

This article explores the concepts of transnational relations and activism in the study of International Relations, specifically the role of civil society in transnational advocacy. It is fascinating to discuss the role of civil society when state actors are no longer the most prominent actors in International Relations studies in the midst of globalisation. Some articles related to transnational relations have been written by the scholars of International Relations such as Thomas Risse-Kappen (1995). Even so, one of the most sophisticated concepts of transnational activism was introduced by Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink (1998), in Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. In order to fully understand transnational activism in the study of International Relations, a divergent perspective can be applied. In this article, the authors aim to examine the recent debates and its counternarratives in International Relations through critical and constructivism lenses. Firstly, this article would describe the concepts of transnationalism and transnational activism in the study of International Relations (state of the art). Secondly, it would be a discussion in the literature on transnationalism and transnational activism which cover themes about norm diffusion, the ‘boomerang pattern’, political opportunity structures and accountability and effectiveness. The last part is conclusion that can be drawn from this consensus and debates in the concept of transnational activism.

Interfaith dialogue has not gained a strategic place in the context of the study of international relations yet, even though its existence has practically provided new dynamics in the constellation of contemporary international relations. Not only that, interfaith dialogue also has sufficient theoretical urgency as a academics study that needs to be continuously developed. The debate between realism and idealism continues to develop in contemporary international relations studies. This development is influenced by the expansion of the meaning of actors who not only talk about state actors but also non-state actors, the expansion of the issues was originally focused on hard political issues but also focus to the discussion on low political issues, as well as how the interaction between actors with the religious discussion of these issues has created varied patterns of relations between actors in the study of international relations. This study attempts to place the phenomenon of interfaith dialogue theoretically in the study of international relations through a rational perspective, by seeking a middle ground between the realism and idealism debates. The English School approach, foreign policy, and diplomacy will try to be presented so that the theoretical position of inter-religious dialogue will become clear as a phenomenon that continues to develop in the study of international relations. The importance of this research is to provide the possibility of a wider variety of studies in the context of international relations, so that the existence of international relations as a scientific discipline can be optimized for its contribution to analyzing social phenomena across national borders that occur and growing.

It is not an easy task to attempt an overview of the state of the International Relations discipline in Hispanic America. The first obstacle to such an undertaking is the heterogeneity of the countries involved — namely, all former Spanish colonies south of the Rio Grande. With this in mind we have chosen to concentrate on those countries where the study of International Relations is most developed, namely Argentina, Chile, and Mexico, understanding these to be representative of developments in the region as a whole, even though we do not deal with each of these in detail. The second obstacle, which is inherent to the discipline itself and is not peculiar to Hispanic America alone, has to do with the difficulties of defining what does or does not belong to the field. If in the very academic centres where the study of International Relations was first developed there is a great deal of effort still being expended in attempting to define the subject-matter, one can imagine to what degree this problem is compounded in a region where the social sciences as a whole have not acquired the level of specialisation that one sees in Europe and North America.

Journal Article Change and the Study of International Relations: the Evaded Dimension Get access Change and the Study of International Relations: the Evaded Dimension. Edited by Barry Buzan and R. J. Barry Jones. London: Frances Pinter. 1981. 241 pp.£13.50. P. A. Reynolds P. A. Reynolds 1University of Lancaster Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar International Affairs, Volume 57, Issue 4, Autumn 1981, Pages 635–636, https://doi.org/10.2307/2619865 Published: 01 October 1981

A study of ethics must be regarded as incomplete if it does not offer tools for analysing moral problems arising in the international context, particularly in an age of growing interdependence between the peoples of the world. Similarly, a study of international relations must be thought to be imperfect if it leaves out normative questions.To this it may be objected that International Relations is an empirical discipline, and that it can legitimately leave normative considerations to moral philosophers. However, such a division of labour is unfortunately more likely to result in mere division rather than efficient co-operation. Moreover, international relations, the subject-matter, is logically, as well as historically, prior to International Relations, the academic discipline. Therefore, a study of international relations, undertaken by International Relations experts, cannot be claimed to be complete if it neglects those aspects of the subject-matter which have occupied the minds of many thinkers who do not consider themselves as IR specialists.

Contrary to appearances, it is difficult to make a straightforward distinction between „internationalism” and „imperiality”. On the one hand, from the point of view of a normative theory of international politics, crossing this line seems to lead from legitimization of international relations (internationalism) to a lack of it (imperiality), and from normality to uniqueness. On the other hand, from a historical point of view, the empire is a ubiquitous form of participation in the internationalism of the social world. One of the „sacred” rules in the discourse on the modern international system seems to be the prohibition of the empire. During the last twenty years the notions „empire” and „imperialism” have returned to the language of analysis of international relations. One can observe a specific rehabilitation of the notion of empire as a unit of analysis and imperialism as an international relation practice. The article presents the understanding of the notions „empire” and „imperialism” in the studies of international relations and the history of international relations. The author discusses often ignored in the international relations studies ideas and practices shared by empires and the influence that the overseas empires exerted on Europe and its culture. A significant problem discussed by the author is the explanation of a lack of particular interest in imperialism in the main research streams in studies of international relations. Therefore, the author presents the essence of understanding of the problem of imperialism in the streams of theorizing in international relations inspired by Marxist critique of capitalism, starting with W. Lenin and K. Kautsky, through E. Wood, A. Gunder Franka, I. Wallerstein, and finishing with M. Hardt, A. Negri and theorists of new imperialism. In the last part of the article the author motivates his thesis that one hundred years of theoretical reflection over the empire and imperialism, in which a significant place is taken by research carried out in the 2nd half of the 20st century in the form of dependency theory and analysis of world-systems, has taken a roundabout way, returning at the beginning of the 21st century to the problem of violence and strength within the capitalist social relations. Recent events in international relations have shown troublesome relations between the ideal of social agreements, especially in the economic sphere, and using military force in international relations.