Critical International Relations Theory Research Articles

Anarchic Unfreedom: Critical International Theory Versus Neoliberalism and the New Right

In recent years, a number of voices have raised concerns about the role of critical theory in the contemporary political crisis. Critical theory has been accused of providing intellectual resources for the global rise of the new right, whether in Trump’s America or in Putin’s Russia. While acknowledging the ostensibly critical, even emancipatory appearance of the new right, my paper insists on the need for critical theory. Indeed, a desire for liberation is expressed not only by the new right, but also by the ruling neoliberal discourse. Both neoliberalism and the new right make emancipatory use of a key modern political distinction: the distinction between hierarchy and anarchy, or inside and outside. Both promise liberation from hierarchies and want to achieve freedom through anarchic competition, either on globalized markets or in international relations. However, upon close examination, the promised freedom is an anarchic unfreedom. It submits all competitors to a powerful competitive logic, justifies hierarchic submission and harbors an enormous potential for violence. Critical International Relations theory is uniquely suited to diagnose this problem and to point us into an alternative direction.

Post-growth agrifood systems: Towards an emancipatory politics

Abstract A world without hunger demands a post-growth rewiring of the global agrifood system predicated on emancipatory politics that enables reform of actors and institutions outside agriculture. This is necessary to shift out of the prevalent growth-hegemonic framing of agriculture and its contributions to economic growth, where the structural injustice of hunger is rendered invisible. Recent International Relations (IR) scholarship highlights the institutional arrangements underpinning global agrifood problems. This paper uses critical IR theory to understand the structural mechanisms and relations of power through which the growth-hegemonic theorisation of agriculture is produced and reproduced, sustaining hunger within an exceedingly financialised agro-industrial complex. The structural power of knowledge shaping the interlocking structures of finance, production, and security is evident in the extremely high multilevel concentration in modern agrifood systems. This structural power evident in local decentralised agroecological systems and in transnational agrarian movements reflects post-growth principles of sufficiency, shared prosperity, care, ecological and social justice.Together, they are the counter-hegemonic voices, cooperative social systems, and class interests championed by post-growth politics.

The Moving Spirit of Settler Colonialism: Temsula Ao, Counter-Sovereignty, and the Politics of Intervention in the Borderlands of India

Abstract This paper investigates the incursions, or more accurately, the interventions of the Indian state into what are often called its “Northeast borderlands.” It grapples with the specific space occupied by those who belong to this minoritized region in India. Theoretically, it works through conceptions of “sovereignty” and “intervention” to underscore what is at stake for those who lie within the remit of recognized state sovereignty but are nonetheless subject to brutal and invasive “intervention.” The article engages Naga author Temsula Ao’s writing on questions of “tribal” identity, globalization, and borders to situate India as a postcolonial “settler” state. Finally, it puts her work in conversation with Manu Karuka’s notion of “counter-sovereignty” to highlight the ways in which even critical International Relations (IR) theory risks falling into the trap of reifying “sovereignty” and unwittingly giving credence to Westphalian and Euro-centric understandings of sovereignty at the expense of alternative and prior imaginaries.

A New Comprehensive Two-Volume Study on Theories of International Relations in Bulgarian

Abstract The two-volume study, authored and edited by Professor Gotchev, presents a broad range of theoretical approaches and frameworks of analysis in International Relations (IR) and is the most comprehensive textbook on the study of IR theories in Bulgarian. The first volume surveys the essence of political research and philosophical aspects of social science, the grand debates in IR and the main approaches—realism, liberalism, and Marxism. It also reviews critical IR theory and examines the importance of international political economy in the discipline of IR. The second volume, which is a collection of essays written by six different US and European scholars, is organised in five different sections and focuses on a broad range of grand approaches to IR and middle-range theories. The former include constructivism, the English School, postmodernism and poststructuralism, feminism, and green theory; the latter deal with a broad set of frameworks, such as behavioural, psychological and integration theories, theories of foreign policy, cooperation, alliances, and international organisations. Special attention is paid to geopolitics.

Non-Western Theories in International Relations Education and Research: The Case of Turkey/Turkish Academia

This study examines the usage of non-Western theories in research and education by International Relations (IR) scholars in Turkey. Our primary purpose is to understand the level of engagement with the non-Western IR debate, with its prospects and variations, in Turkish academia, and to evaluate the familiarity of Turkish IR scholars from different schools with non-Western IR theories. Relevant data were obtained from a questionnaire with 47 items designed to let participants, consisting of 116 academicians at IR departments from 57 Turkish Universities, provide their teaching experiences, views, and perceptions concerning non-Western IR Theory. While our findings based on this data confirm the literature on the scarcity of non-Western theories in Turkish IR scholarship, we have also furthered it with many details. Firstly, according to the findings, respondents who study and teach IR Theory at Turkish universities think that the IR theories of Western origin dominating the literature are not universal or objective in terms of their function as interpreters of IR issues. But interestingly, those considerations direct scholars to Western critical IR Theory schools rather than non-Western theories. The other key conclusion of this study confirms our expectations. The thoughts, concepts and theories emanating from the Turkish-Islamic world have much more recognition than other non-Western IR theories among Turkish IR scholars.

Fantastic Theories and Where to Find Them: Rethinking Interlocutors in Global IR

How can we appreciate non-Western agency in theorising world politics without reintroducing parochialism and exceptionalism, thus reproducing the very problem that motivated global international relations (IR) in the first place? In this article, I explore an alternative approach to engaging with non-Western IR theories, which I refer to as the embedded observer approach. First, taking the scholarship on Chinese IR as an example, I argue that the present predicament of global IR is in part attributable to the way scholars engage with non-Western political thought. Drawing from discussions in critical IR and Comparative Political Theory, I propose a methodological adjustment for the study of non-Western theories. Specifically, I argue that by shifting focus from isolated scholars and texts to critical dialogues among autochthonous intellectuals, the researcher has the chance to learn about and appreciate the clashes of ideas, analytical perspectives, and methodological tools that together constitute the living intellectual tradition in a non-Western society. As a demonstration, I analyse the People’s Republic of China (PRC) scholars’ critical reaction to Zhao Tingyang’s Tianxia System through the lens of three key topics in the debate over the thesis. The discussion highlights the need to rethink interlocutors in global IR and the utility of an embedded observer approach for engaging with knowledge traditions beyond the West, both in IR and beyond. 神奇理论在哪里？反思全球国际关系学中的对话者

Como Gramsci viaja na América Latina? Antes e depois da Teoria Crítica das Relações Internacionais.

Abstract In the last 40 years, Critical International Relations Theory (CIRT) has influenced scholars in the Global North as well as the South. Latin America shows particular features. On the one hand, conceptualisation did not divorce the domestic from the international, as in dependency theory. On the other, Gramsci was widely read much before Robert W. Cox and even before International Relations was constituted as a discipline in its own right. In this context, this article aims to present possible contributions of (neo)Gramscian approaches to the understanding of Latin America as a region. It does so by establishing a dialectical relationship between a few topics that offer insights (and the theoretical reflection they provoke) and some (neo)Gramscian concepts. Hence, we want to re-read, in a dialectical vein, both CIRT and some aspects of how Gramscian thought has travelled in Latin America. We intend to analyse how such thinking is thriving, if at all, and discuss the possible relevance of rescuing Gramscian international thought to think about the region.

A crítica ainda é possível na Teoria das Relações Internacionais? Um engajamento crítico com a vocação de RI

Abstract The article offers a critique of recent efforts to read international relations theory – and its theorists – as especially positioned to offer a critique of international politics. It does so by engaging Daniel Levine’s claim that international relations theory has a special vocation for critique which is unparalleled by other disciplines. By problematizing Levine’s political, ethical and epistemological approach to sustainable critique, I argue that international relations theory has been particularly engaged with a politics of crisis that centers Western modes of subjectivity as the only frame of reference for thinking about politics and history. As a consequence, Western international relations theory has become both inadequate and dispensable for many critical theorists of international politics in much of the world, even when it comes to its most critical approaches. By way of conclusion, I offer an approach to critical international relations theory that starts from the politics of colonialism, instead of crisis.

Global Cybersecurity: New Directions in Theory and Methods

This thematic issue advocates a range of novel theoretical and methodological directions applicable to cybersecurity studies. Drawing on critical International Relations theory, Science and Technology Studies, participant observation, quantitative political science, and other social science methods and theory, the contributors advance modes of invigorating the exploration of cybersecurity as an assemblage of sociotechnical practices. In so doing, this issue seeks to enhance understanding of the politics and strategies of cybersecurity, one of the most complex and diverse technical and political challenges of our contemporary world.

Reconstructive Methodology and Critical International Relations Theory

Abstract Drawing on the work of the latest generation of social philosophers institutionally or intellectually linked to the Frankfurt School, this article examines the critical-reconstructive-explanatory methodology that became a distinguishing feature of contemporary critical theory after its ‘reconstructive turn’. The article aims to show how these recent developments can contribute to overcoming the various criticisms that continue to challenge Critical International Relations Theory (CIRT) from a methodological viewpoint, such as its normative and interpretative emphasis at the expense of the empirical dimension of analysis, its inability to provide a substantive explanation of the social pathologies and mechanisms of domination it criticises, its insulation from issues of pluralism and multiculturalism, the absence of debate with outside approaches, and the lack of clarity on how theory connects to practice. After discussing the main aspects of the contemporary critical theory methodology, the article ends with a brief illustration of this methodology using as a basis the critique of the liberal peacebuilding.

Critical international relations theory at the beginning of the 21st century

The article deals with contemporary tendencies and research in the field of critical theory of international relations. Focusing on the analysis of global power relations, this specific approach within the framework of the science of international relations, draws attention to the different capacities of international actors to influence their own political and economic circumstances. Its contribution to the science of international relations is reflected in the opening (and politicization) of issues that the representatives of traditional theories take as a given fact, or for various reasons do not pay needed attention. The article will present the evolution of the critical theory of international relations, ranging from the radically critical point of view of its founder Robert Cox to the strictly normative orientation of Jurgen Habermas. Contrary to the question of the ?inevitability? of the existing world order (on which the realists insist in particular), as well as the acceptability of dominant patterns and practice of demonstration of power in world politics, it offers alternative visions of the architecture of global relations. It is concluded that the critical theory of international relations, despite numerous criticisms, is relevant, because it approaches the phenomenon of power in a diametrically opposite way, in comparison to the traditional schools of thought in international relations. It provides researchers with analytical tools, so that they can identify the role and significance of both ideas (theory) and practices (political actions) in creating and maintaining the structures of the world order.

Visuality, photography, and media in international relations theory: A review

The way we see war – its visuality – is ever changing and dynamic. Despite the theoretical variety in International Relations (IR) scholarship, the themes of visuality, photography, and media have not been considered in a systematic fashion. The positivist core of IR is limited in its capacity to consider these themes outside of a cause-and-effect framework. This results in media mainly discussed in terms of its influence on international politics via its impact on (primarily American) foreign policy. The media and foreign policy literature follows this legacy; it arose as a response to post Cold War events and technological shifts. Similarly, the Revolution in Military Affairs of the 1990s opened up a space for strategic studies to address media and visuality. Recent literature from strategic studies engages with cultural and social theory in a way that shows how such tools may be used for exploitation as well as emancipation. In opposition, the post-positivist research tradition of critical IR theory problematizes the world created by rationalist–objectivist social science and seeks answers to constitutive questions about the construction, production, and performance of actors and structures in International Politics. Flowing from this, the visual securitization program rejects the rationalism of the media and foreign policy literature, while still investigating the links between media and decision-makers. Overall, critical IR theory has carved a productive space for dealing with these themes by breaking away completely from the rationalist legacy and putting forward a more hermeneutic – as opposed to positivistic – approach to the subject. This review concludes that the way IR has so far dealt with these themes narrows our field of vision and prevents us from envisioning the broader regime of representation of war photography, a claim to be upheld in future research.

European integration and the problem of the state: universality, particularity, and exemplarity in the crafting of the European Union

The European Union is often presented as an entity that has ‘moved beyond’ the model of organising political life along the way of the modern sovereign state. This paper questions this understanding by engaging a set of texts that could be understood as exemplary of the EU's official discourse of Europe: EU's failed Constitutional Treaty and Javier Solana's collected speeches. A paradox is herein identified: the values that are said to sustain Europe's identity and upon which Europe is founded are simultaneously presented as distinctly European and universal. It is suggested that Europe is being crafted in a pendular oscillation between particularising and universalising the values upon which Europe allegedly rests. By drawing on critical International Relations theory, the paper suggests that this very contradictory oscillation between particularising and universalising Europe's values to an important extent mirrors modern statecraft. One should therefore think twice before announcing the construction of the European Union as something qualitatively different from, or ‘gentler’ than, modern statecraft.

The Harm Principle and Recognition Theory

This paper explores potential points of synthesis between two leading theorists in Critical Theory and Critical International Relations Theory, Axel Honneth and Andrew Linklater. Whereas Linklater’s recent work on the harm principle has turned away from the critical social theory of the Frankfurt School in favour of Norbert Elias and process sociology, the paper observes a fundamental complementarity between harm and the precepts of recognition theory that can bridge these otherwise disparate approaches to emancipation. The paper begins with a brief overview of Linklater’s emancipatory vision before examining his recent turn to the harm principle and Eliasian process sociology. It is argued that Honneth’s work, particularly the ideas of mutual recognition and the diagnosis of social pathologies, clearly resonant with Linklater’s defence of ethical universalism and can help further the emancipatory project of Critical International Relations Theory. In particular, Honneth’s intersubjective concept of autonomy is argued to provide a normative and empirical standard for emancipation premised on the historically progressive expansion of attitudes of recognition, born out of social struggles, toward the ideal institutionalisation of mutual recognition in world politics.

The best there is? Communication, objectivity and the future of Critical International Relations Theory

Jürgen Habermas’s theory of communicative action has provided the inspiration for a school of Critical International Relations Theory which looks to communication as a source of praxis, and therefore a means of emancipation. This article argues that Critical International Relations Theorists have been too ready to accept Habermas’s claims about the emancipatory power of communication. In particular, it is not clear that a Habermasian Critical International Relations Theory can address the concerns of more sophisticated materialists — not least those of Habermas’s predecessors in the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory. One of the most original of these predecessors, Theodor Adorno, argued that the pursuit of communication between subjects would result in the betrayal of Critical Theory to the requirements of instrumental reason. The article suggests that similar concerns are apparent in International Relations: in Marxian criticisms of the turn to communication; in accusations of ‘anthropocentrism’ aimed at post-positivists by Critical Realists; and in Andrew Linklater’s emphasis on the common human capacity to experience and recognize bodily suffering. Adorno’s Critical Theory points to the need for a reorientation of Critical International Relations Theory towards an account of praxis which draws upon the experiences and needs of corporeal, vulnerable human beings who are part of a material world. In this way, critical International Relations theorists can carry forward the critique of global socio-political forces which the majority of the world’s inhabitants experience as an arbitrary constraint.

On the Methods of Critical Theory: Advancing the Project of Emancipation beyond the Early Frankfurt School

This article offers a reconstruction of the methodological tools pioneered by the first generation of the Frankfurt School (FS) and how they have been adapted in the contemporary project of emancipation in Critical International Relations Theory (CIRT). It is argued that the praxeological and methodological commitments of the early FS are of continuing utility in the post-positivist turn in IR theory. The paper also argues that CIRT has made significant advances on the original programme of CT developed by Horkheimer in the early 1930s. In particular, it is contended that the alleged pessimism typically associated with the later work of the early FS can be overcome if critical analysis looks beyond the state to those possibilities of emancipation pregnant within the global processes of world politics. Here the work of CIRT is argued to offer a number of advances on the sociology of the early FS, which was problematically confined to the examination of Euro- and state-centric possibilities for emancipation.

Cooperative Security: Grand Strategy Meets Critical Theory?

Major powers are frequently urged to embrace grand strategies tied to particular International Relations theories. In the case of United States foreign policy, scholars generally analyse a well-known set of strategic choices – primacy, selective engagement, offshore balancing, collective security and cooperative security – favoured by relatively mainstream realist and liberal thinkers in International Relations. This article explores the evolution of cooperative security as an idea from its clear ties to liberal and neoliberal international relations theory to its current understanding in world politics, which is surprisingly consistent with many emancipatory ideals of critical International Relations theory. Cooperative security no longer merely implies multilateralism, negotiation and arms control. Rather, security is now more frequently described as indivisible, and genuine cooperation is said to require shared decision-making and consensual practices. Non-governmental organisations are more and more granted a voice in security discussions, as are international institutions. While weapons and warfare remain important security concerns, the cooperative security agenda today includes ideas associated with human security, including environmental calamity, global inequality and hunger.

Oedipal authority and capitalist sovereignty: a Deleuzoguattarian reading of IR theory

Despite advancements in the theorisation of political sovereignty brought about by the engagements of critical international relations theory, there remain significant lacunae in our understanding of the reproduction of this peculiar configuration of social life. This article, drawing on the collaborative work of Deleuze and Guattari, seeks to provide a more robust theorisation of the subjectivities underpinning modern political sovereignty — here understood as capitalist sovereignty. It looks to their programme of ‘schizoanalysis’, which interrogates the unconscious libidinal investments of capitalist reproduction. Specifically, Deleuze and Guattari argue that a factitious Oedipal configuration of desire allows the sovereign flow of capital. This article gathers insights from schizoanalysis in elucidating a dynamic affective relationship between sovereignty and the territorial state. It also suggests the potential of schizoanalysis for reconceptualising world politics and contributing to emancipatory IR scholarship.

Evolution and Anarchism in International Relations: The Challenge of Kropotkin’s Biological Ontology

This article will utilise Peter Kropotkin’s theory of Mutual Aid to reconsider ontology in International Relations (IR). Mutual Aid Theory holds that the evolution of organisms is shaped by cooperation within a group of species against a variable ecology; thus giving rise to a sociality instinct. This is contrasted with the Malthusian assumption that evolution takes place at the individual level according to their intraspecific fitness. Mutual Aid Theory, applied to the realm of politics, overturns collective-action-problem-grounded theories that hold that the egoistic and competitive drive of humans must be overcome to promote cooperation. Bradley Thayer applied the orthodox individual-fitness interpretation of evolution in an attempt to shore up realist arguments. I argue that such reductionist approaches to studying politics are archaic and not congruent with current scientific understanding. A Critical Realist (CR) approach, placing analytical priority on ontological investigations over epistemological/methodological commitments, is employed to assist in the criticism of orthodox reductionist ontologies. However, equally in line with Kropotkin’s Anarchist ideas, I argue that this critical realist approach also provokes ontologically-driven inquiries into post-sovereignty global politics and can inform the emancipatory intent of Critical IR theory, along side the basic Anarchist ontological claim: society precedes the State.

Notas à Crise Política de Honduras: Relações com o Brasil e o Caso Zelaya

The aim of this paper is to briefly comment the recent Honduran political crisis, analyzing the country’s foreign policy concerning the “Zelaya case”. To do so, we will make a brief reconstruction of the country’s historical process, marking the most important facts for a broader understanding and culminating with a report of the 2009 events within the context of the political crisis involving President Manuel Zelaya Rosales, whose outcome precipitated the end of his government. Then we will analyze the Brazilian performance in the set scenario and compare it with the performance of President Hugo Chavez from the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, commenting on the previous and current Honduran government, both internally and internationally. Also, we will underline the reasoning to the analysis based on the Critical International Relations Theory and on reflections on the state of emergency, according to Italian jurist Giorgio Agambem. We then propose an interpretative approach of the crisis’ elements, inviting further analyses, conceptual reflections, and debates on Honduras.