Abstract

Abstract In recent years, International Relations theorists have observed a resurgence in geopolitical rivalry, much of which is coalescing around cases of contested statehood. Yet, while there is a considerable volume of work on state recognition, the field would benefit from incorporating alternate approaches to geopolitics. A common approach entails treating geopolitical interests as independent variables for comparison against other factors. However, in prioritizing the comparison of variables, such work tells us less about how particular geopolitical interests arise in connection to cases of contested statehood. This paper therefore instead proposes a discursive approach to geopolitical interests. Following this approach, theorists will be able to treat grand strategies in a similar manner to the way the recognition scholarship already treats norms—as ideas that shape the dynamics of recognition but seldom point directly to specific recognition stances. By enabling theorists to account for the role of choice, contingency, and contestation in mediating grand strategies, this approach yields more comprehensive explanations of geopolitical interest and state recognition. In advancing its discursive approach to geopolitics and state recognition, this paper engages and extends recent constructivist work on grand strategy. The paper then illustrates the approach using the example of US policy toward the 1971 East Pakistan Crisis.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.