International Political Theory Research Articles

‘Human nature’, science and international political theory

The Post-War rise in importance of the individual in international political theory, as evidenced by the development of the international human rights regime, International Criminal Law and theories of global justice, has, paradoxically, been accompanied by an highly critical approach to the concept of human nature. Criticisms of human nature largely rest on the association of the concept of with social Darwinism, racism, sexism and eugenics, but, understood properly and at the right level of generality, the concept of human nature need not attract such undesirable, pseudo-scientific bedfellows. The modern science of evolutionary psychology is in the process of changing our understanding of the social implications of our genetic inheritance, and social and political theorists ought not to resist this change, and international relations scholars should not leave the field to realist scholars. Premature generalisations based on the findings of evolutionary psychology should certainly be resisted, but so should blanket rejections of the new knowledge. The task for international political theorists is to find a way of integrating the findings of the new human sciences into a humane understanding of the human animal.

Constituent Power beyond the State: An Emerging Debate in International Political Theory

In this review article, I suggest that the books under review should be conceived of as trailblazers of an emerging debate in international political theory. They all innovatively apply the concept of constituent power to the international realm and thereby contribute to establishing a new principle for the democratic legitimacy of international institutions. I argue that we should aim to develop a systematic theory of constituent power beyond the state because such a tool could considerably enhance the analytical categories of our research on democratic legitimacy beyond the state. Furthermore, I propose research questions for this new field of study, concerning conceptual, methodological and institutional aspects, and in turn apply these to the different conceptions of an international pouvoir constituant presented in the volumes under review in order to discuss their strengths and weaknesses.

Pojęcia imperium i imperializm w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych

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.

International politics in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century central Asia: beyond anarchy in international-relations theory

Using historical analysis of relations between city-states and other international actors in Central Asia during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, this article evaluates new structural theories of international politics, chiefly those of David Lake and Jack Donnelly. Pre-colonial Central Asia offers a usefully tough case for structural theories, since it so little resembles the modern international order that these theories were developed to describe. Empirically, the article proceeds by evaluating the region's city-states' relations with three groups of actors: one another; neighbouring empires; and the many non-state actors present at the time. It concludes with an assessment of the merits of the new structuralisms, and a discussion of their value for constructivist international-relations theories of international change.

Has Violence Declined in World Politics?

Winning the War on War: The Decline of Armed Conflict Worldwide.By Joshua S. Goldstein. New York: Dutton, 2011. 400p. $26.95 cloth, $17.00 paper.Violence is an ever present and very visible feature of our political landscape. And war—its strategy, its preparation, and its conduct—remains a central preoccupation of political elites and of political scientists. In his new bookWinning the War on War,Joshua S. Goldstein sifts the statistical and historiographical evidence to tell a story of how we seem to be winning the long-term fight against war, and why. Goldstein places major emphasis on the rise of international peacekeeping, but he also discusses alternative explanations, such as the liberal peace. In this symposium a number of scholars of international politics, comparative politics, and political theory have been asked to comment on Goldstein's book and on the broader theme it addresses.—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor

Has Violence Declined in World Politics?

Winning the War on War: The Decline of Armed Conflict Worldwide. By Joshua S. Goldstein. New York: Dutton, 2011. 400p. $26.95 cloth, $17.00 paper.Violence is an ever present and very visible feature of our political landscape. And war—its strategy, its preparation, and its conduct—remains a central preoccupation of political elites and of political scientists. In his new book Winning the War on War, Joshua S. Goldstein sifts the statistical and historiographical evidence to tell a story of how we seem to be winning the long-term fight against war, and why. Goldstein places major emphasis on the rise of international peacekeeping, but he also discusses alternative explanations, such as the liberal peace. In this symposium a number of scholars of international politics, comparative politics, and political theory have been asked to comment on Goldstein's book and on the broader theme it addresses.—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor

Has Violence Declined in World Politics?

Winning the War on War: The Decline of Armed Conflict Worldwide.By Joshua S. Goldstein. New York: Dutton, 2011. 400p. $26.95 cloth, $17.00 paper.Violence is an ever present and very visible feature of our political landscape. And war—its strategy, its preparation, and its conduct—remains a central preoccupation of political elites and of political scientists. In his new bookWinning the War on War,Joshua S. Goldstein sifts the statistical and historiographical evidence to tell a story of how we seem to be winning the long-term fight against war, and why. Goldstein places major emphasis on the rise of international peacekeeping, but he also discusses alternative explanations, such as the liberal peace. In this symposium a number of scholars of international politics, comparative politics, and political theory have been asked to comment on Goldstein's book and on the broader theme it addresses.—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor

Global Ethics in the Thought of Laozi: Constructing China’s Soft Power

The thought of Laozi is of paramount importance in Chinese traditional culture. It is significant for us to discover some meaningful factors in Laozi’s ideological systems in order to expand and strengthen China’s soft power. Coincidently, there exists something in common between the thought of Laozi and ethics in Western political philosophy. The comparison of these ethical views of different value systems would help in better understanding the advantages of Chinese traditional culture in the process of China’s soft power construction. This essay tries to summarise some common factors between the thought of Laozi and Western global ethics that can contribute to the construction of China’s soft power. This could in turn offer an approach to establishing a ‘Chinese school’ in international political theories as well as contribute to global ethics architecture. This essay has been divided into three sections. The first discusses global ethics in Western political philosophy while the second investigates global ethics in Laozi’s ideological system and then makes a contrast between Laozi’s global ethics and those in Western political philosophy. In the final section, some fundamental principles in China’s soft power construction will be explored.

Book Review: Other Areas: Theories of International Politics and Zombies

Book Review: Other Areas: Theories of International Politics and Zombies

Theorizing Agency in Hobbes's Wake: The Rational Actor, the Self, or the Speaking Subject?

AbstractThe rationalist-constructivist divide that runs through the discipline of International Relations (IR) revolves around two figures of agency, the rational actor and the constructivist “self.” In this article I examine the models of agency that implicitly or explicitly underpin the study of international politics. I show how both notions of the rational actor and the constructivist self have remained wedded to individualist understandings of agency that were first incarnated in the discipline's self-understandings by Hobbes's natural individual. Despite its turn to social theory, this persistent individualism has hampered constructivism's ability to appraise the ways in which the actors and structures of international politics mutually constitute one another “all the way down.” My purpose is to lay the foundations for a nonindividualist, adequately relational, social theory of international politics. To this end I propose a third model of agency, Lacan's split speaking subject. Through a Lacanian reading of theLeviathan, I show how the speaking subject has in fact laid buried away in the discipline's Hobbesian legacy all along.

‘Only in the Leap from the Lion's Head Will He Prove His Worth’: Natural Law and International Relations

This article argues the benefits of including a theological interpretation of natural law morality within the normative discourses of international politics. It challenges the assumption of a Grotian secular natural law arguing that practical reason, in a Thomist interpretation, is better suited to the demands of international political theory. It engages with themes of agency, practical reason, and community in order to enhance the content of the post-territorial community evidenced in ethical cosmopolitan debates. Likewise, it envisions simultaneously enhancing a rapprochement among cosmopolitan and communitarian discourses of international politics facilitated through an institutional design guided by the morality of natural law.

Kenneth Waltz, Adam Smith and the Limits of Science: Hard choices for neoclassical realism

This article argues that neoclassical realism (NCR), though it presents one of the most intuitively attractive frameworks for understanding states’ actions, continues to struggle with a central conceptual tension. Some have argued that NCR is compatible with a structural realist approach, even that it is a ‘logical extension’ of it. Yet in seeking to identify law-like patterns of state behaviour arising from the varied features of states themselves, NCR appears to breach the outer limits of what Kenneth Waltz, the founding father of structural International Relations theory, thought tolerable in a theory of international politics. Thus, NCR arguably faces a fork in the road as to its future agenda and theoretical identity: should it limit itself essentially to chronicling anomalous occurrences within a fundamentally Waltzian paradigm, or try to map new rules of state behaviour on a scale that ultimately calls the primacy of Waltz's ‘systemic imperatives’ into question?

The ‘Concert of Democracies’: Why some states are more equal than others

This article engages with a discourse emerging from international political theory, international law and political science on awarding privileges to democracies in crucial issues of global governance. Proposals that a ‘Concert of Democracies’ should be legally entitled to take decisions in case the United Nations Security Council is unable or unwilling to act are amongst the most prominent expression of this vision of the stratification of the international society into first-class and second-class regimes. The article reconstructs central tenets of this discourse on the inclusion and exclusion of regime types and shows that this kind of differentiation of states has been very much inspired by readings and appropriations of ‘democratic peace’ scholarship in International Relations. The article critiques the underlying problematic theoretical assumptions and the practical implications of democratic peace theory and policy proposals inferred from it.

CHARLES L. GLASER Rational Theory of International Politics: The Logic of Competition and Cooperation

CHARLES L. GLASER Rational Theory of International Politics: The Logic of Competition and Cooperation

A Pseudo Dichotomy: Hobbism and Kantianism in Political Philosophy

This article examines the nature of a common tendency in studies of the political philosophies of Hobbes and Kant to presume that a dichotomy exists between them. In order to investigate this tendency, the two prevailing approaches in current scholarship on Kant and Hobbes are explored, and the content of two ideologies on which these studies heavily rely, Hobbism and Kantianism, are revealed. In the final section, a discussion of Hobbes' and Kant's theories of international politics will be used to point to how this tendency functions and what consequences it has for the study of political philosophy. The article closes by drawing attention to the wider implications of this tendency when it is applied to studies of Western political thought.

The Antipolitical Theory of Responsibility to Protect

The doctrine of Responsibility to Protect, as initially set out in the Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty of 2001, is difficult to place within the usual framework of IR theories (liberal internationalist, realist or radical) or International Political Theories (communitarian, cosmopolitan). This is primarily because by framing the issue of intervention in terms of the protection of civilians, the devisers of the doctrine attempted to de-politicise the act of intervention. An examination of the ICISS Report, the UN’s World Summit Outcome Document of 2005 and the experience of the application of the doctrine to the Libyan crisis of 2011 demonstrates that this attempt has not succeeded, and that the ‘antipolitical’ nature of Responsibility to Protect is a weakness not a strength. Still, the doctrine has had considerable success in changing the terms under which intervention is discussed at the UN and elsewhere.

Constructivism and the Bomb: Social Theory of International Politics and Two-Level Game Theory Applied to the Negotiations over Iran's Nuclear Programme

Constructivism and the Bomb: Social Theory of International Politics and Two-Level Game Theory Applied to the Negotiations over Iran's Nuclear Programme

Introduction: the idea of global political justice

The past 30 years have witnessed the flourishing of normative international political theory as a new field of research with its own agenda, debates, and methodological disputes. While there is inc...

Another Waltz? Methodological Rhetoric and Practice in Theory of International Politics

Although Theory of International Politics is a standard-bearer for explanatory theory in international relations (IR), Waltz’s methodology has been subject to numerous quite disparate analyses. One reason why it has proved hard to pin down is that too little attention has been paid to how, in practice, Waltz approaches real-world problems. Despite his neopositivist rhetoric, Waltz applies neorealism in a notably loose, even indeterminate, fashion. There is therefore a disjunction between what he says and what he does. This is partly explained by his unsatisfactory attempt to reconcile his avowed neopositivism with his belief that international politics is characterized by organized complexity. The inconsistencies thus created also help to make sense of why competing interpretations of his methodology have emerged. Some aspects of his work do point beyond these particular methodological travails in ways that will continue to be of interest to IR theorists, but its most enduring methodological lesson may be that rhetoric and practice do not necessarily fit harmoniously together.

Realism and the Kantian Tradition: A Revisionist Account

In contemporary international political theory, ‘Cosmopolitanism’ is typically juxtaposed to ‘Realism’, with many varieties of the former building on Kantian moral and political ideals, and the latter presumably rejecting Kant and his aspiration for far-reaching global reform. In agreement with a growing body of scholarship that seeks to challenge conventional views of Realism, this essay attends to the surprisingly complex views of the Kantian legacy (including Hans Kelsen, perhaps the most important neo-Kantian international thinker in the last century) within its ranks. Not all Realists have been unambiguously critical of Kant, and when in fact they have criticized him, they have done so for many different reasons. First-generation Realists (e.g. E. H. Carr, John Herz, Hans Morgenthau, Reinhold Niebuhr, Frederick Schuman and Georg Schwarzenberger) offered an ambivalent reading of Kantianism consistent with their endorsement of the ultimate desirability of major alterations to the global status quo, whereas second-generation Realists (i.e. Henry Kissinger and Kenneth Waltz) tended to read Kant so as to transform him into a forerunner of their own anti-reformist and institutionally conservative versions of Realism. An examination of Realism’s rendezvous with Kantianism not only helps draw a more differentiated portrayal of Realism than is still found in much scholarship, but it also helps us understand how Realism dramatically changed within a relatively short space of time during the immediate postwar decades. It also points to some important potential starting points for a more fruitful exchange between Cosmopolitans and Realists.