International Political Theory Research Articles

Integration and Transnational Political Interest among Immigrant-Origin Voters: An Analysis of Germans from Turkey and their Children in the Immigrant German Election Study 2017

What is the effect of integration in Germany on transnational political interest among Germans from Turkey and their children? Using data from the 2017 Immigrant German Election Study, we operationalise three dimensions of integration and two dependent variables of transnational political interest: the mean level of political interest in German and Turkish politics and net political interest as the difference of those two levels. Our analysis reveals: (1) For general political interest: social integration, by far, has the strongest impact with an estimated 28 % maximum impact on the scale of mean political interest whereas neither, economic or cultural integration nor discrimination experience hardly matter. (2) For net political interest, all three dimensions of integration tilt political interest in favour of German politics with social and economic integration mediating the effect of cultural integration. Economic integration maintains the most sizeable impact with the maximum impact at 11 % of the scale of net political interest. Overall, Germans from Turkey and their children empirically show a clear picture that more integration into German society leads to higher general political interest and a profile of transnational political interest tilted more towards German politics. Theoretically, these findings allow reconciling the expectations of the assimilation-mobility thesis (immigrant-origin voters become less distinguishable the less cohesive their group is) and of the international political theory (immigrant-origin voters are pluri-local political beings who are much less bound by national territories).

Resisting the global neoliberal economy

As a Western citizen, am I responsible for the serious injustices, such as sweatshop labour, characterising our global economy? Benjamin McKean’s terrific new book, Disorienting Neoliberalism: Global Justice and the Outer Limit of Freedom, shows why this is a misleading question – one that will not properly orient us in relation to the neoliberal economy. McKean argues that we need to recognise that we are unfree under unjust transnational economic institutions and thus we have a shared interest in resisting neoliberalism. This means that we should become disposed to heed the calls for solidarity by others across the world whose freedom is also impaired by neoliberal institutions. McKean’s book offers a powerful and persuasive new account of global (in)justice and solidarity; it is an inspiring call to arms for egalitarian theorists. Although I will raise two friendly critical observations about McKean’s argument, I recognise that this book is a major contribution to international political theory and that it sets a superb example of how to combine scholarly rigour with what might be called activist theorising.

Interpretation and Rationality

Although influential in philosophy and relevant to international political theory’s (IPT) key concerns, Donald Davidson has not received commensurate attention in IPT. I aim here to commence filling this gap. I explore Davidson’s insights which fruitfully challenge established disciplinary views. The notions of rationality, objectivity and truth, and, on the other hand, those of intersubjectivity, language and interpretation are often needlessly separated and constricted by seemingly alternative approaches. Davidson firmly reconnects these notions. He helps rethink the realist, strong post-positivist, but also liberal, ‘thin’ constructivist and critical (not thoroughly contextualist) approaches. He bridges the normative cosmopolitan–communitarian distinction. Eventually, Davidson laid foundations for a perspective foregrounding possibilities for rational communication and agreement between very different contexts and also for the non-dogmatic, pluralist and dynamic nature of communication itself.

Post-Democracy and Historicism: The Hidden Origin of the Korea-Japan Trade War

Since Japan’s imposition of export controls against Korea in July 2019 and its following countermoves, including the termination of the General Security of Military Information Agreement, the governments of both countries have presented their own narratives of the origin of this trade war, both of which mirror theories of international politics. Nonetheless, these narratives mask several domestic origins. Most importantly, this paper demonstrates that behind the trade war, there has been a preoccupation of the two governments with mutually irreconcilable version forms of historicism. One is Korea’s pro-naturalist historicism, seeing Korean history as being preordained by the universal laws of human progress and defining Japan as a historical reactionary. The other is Japan’s anti-naturalist historicism, upholding internationalism as a new driving force of history that will transform Japan from a war criminal state into a proper subject in international society while criticizing Korea as being a drag on this transformation. This paper argues that, resulting from decades-long neoliberal politics that have disturbed the state-society balance, the national structure of post-democracy has encouraged each government to push historicism to its limit as an alternative source of political legitimacy in lieu of democratic accountability. Concretely, it shows that post-democracy has determined (1) the historicist framing of emerging conflicts, (2) the government’s legislative struggles to realize historicist policies, and (3) the incontestability of historicist hostility by other ideas in each country.

Bentham's International Political Theory: Taking States’ Responsibilities Seriously

AbstractIn this article, I defend the idea that Bentham's international political theory entails a cosmopolitan dimension. First, I explain that Bentham rejects two pillars of internationalism, namely, the sovereign's unconstrained autonomous power and authority in international politics, and the legal and moral personality of the state in the international realm. This critique leads Bentham to construct a complex international political theory which places the issue of states’ responsibility at its centre. Bentham's international theory articulates a minimalist international system of cooperation between states (Part II) and an institutional model of public officials’ responsibilities that together play the crucial role in securing the greatest happiness of the greatest number in the world (Part III). In this last part, I explain how Bentham's international political theory relies heavily on the responsibilities of states, a set of responsibilities that encompasses both national and cosmopolitan responsibilities that public officials in each state hold.

Conversations in international political theory

Conversations in international political theory

The international politics of amour propre: Revisiting Rousseau’s place in international relations theory

Realism, constructivism, and liberal institutionalism share the assumption that states are rational and self-maximizing actors. While these theories disagree as to whether states prioritize military power or economic wealth, they converge around the notion that states pursue these goods rationally and predictably. Complaints against and threats of defection from prominent international security and trade regimes, including NATO and the EU, raise doubts about states’ rationality and predictability. Perhaps these theories’ shared assumption about rational action has become an impediment to understanding state behavior and institutional cooperation. To enrich and to expand the conversation within international political theory, my article turns to Rousseau’s international political thought. Rousseau anticipates central arguments in each of the major traditions of IR theory but locates political self-interest in the sub-rational passion amour propre rather than in reason itself. Rousseau exemplifies a more nuanced way to understand the irrational roots of political motivation and the limits of international order. My paper traces the international implications of amour propre through Rousseau’s key texts on international politics and turns to his “Letter to Philopolis” as a way to re-frame Rousseau’s account of political responsibility.

Инструментализация миграции: управление миграционными потоками в двустороннем формате

This article assesses the theoretical contours and effectiveness of migration governance and diplomacy as an instrument of statecraft in interstate relations. The first part provides an overview of the stakes and challenges of migration within the fields of international relations and political theory. In particular, the category of migration defies the theoretical model of the nation­state, on which traditional IR and political theory are grounded. The second part highlights how the state, through the securitization of migration, uses migration as a tool to reaffirm its defining features: reinforcing its borders, legitimating state sovereignty, and building societal security. The third section demonstrates the usefulness of the category of statecraft within the context of migration governance at a bilateral level owing to the absence of a global normative framework. This relationship can serve different purposes, depending on the context: to harm, to deter, to bargain, to escalate. The last section presents contemporary case studies of the application of migration statecraft by the United States and Russia, as well as by member states along external border of the European Union and within the Schengen space. The elements of "migration statecraft" evidenced by these episodes focus on several objectives: trade blackmail, cooperation in an asymmetrical relation, political threat, and diplomatic escalation for electoral purposes. The variety of these cases illustrates the specificity of statecraft in comparison with foreign policy analysis. While the latter refers to a general and long­term strategy, the former is context­dependent and specific to achievement of a precise desired outcome.

The freedom of speech and right of access to information in the
 emerging system of international information security

The subject. The article is devoted to the analysis of the freedom of speech and access to information in the context of the emerging system of international information security. The purpose of the article is to try to predict the positive and negative consequences of changing international relations in the digital age, to determine the role of freedom of speech and access to information in the context of confrontation between Russia and the United States. The research presented in this article was carried out by combining different disciplinary approaches, including comparative law, comparative politics and international relations, political theory and sociology. Moreover, study includes methods of dialectical logic, analysis and synthesis, as well as formal legal analysis of international legal acts of the UN. The main results and scope of their application. The rights of freedom of speech and access to information is undoubtedly one of the main in the global digital communication context. Degree of implementation of human and citizen rights to freedom of expression and access to information are indicators of political processes, the pace of building a civil society and legal state in current country. These rights are the foundation of modern democracy. The authors carry out a systematic analysis of the categories “freedom of speech” and “the right to access information”, identify the features of implementation of these rights in cyberspace, analyze international practice of legal regulation of these rights and assess the place and role of these rights in the emerging system of international information security. A legal analysis of international legal acts shows that the positions of the United States and the Russian Federation in the field of international information security are gradually converging, and the convergence is going in the direction of the Russian position Conclusions. The limits on the exercise of freedom of speech and access to information do not correspond to the level of development of public relations, because there are no effective legal tools to prevent defamation in the mass media, which in turn can lead to conflict between countries. It is concluded that there is a need for active international cooperation and consistent unification of the legislation of various countries, taking into account that freedom of speech and access to information in cyberspace should have the same level of protection as in the physical world.

Is normative power cosmopolitan? Rethinking European unity, norm diffusion, and international political theory

Despite the apparent consensus that European Union (EU) normative power embodies a Kantian cosmopolitan approach to world politics, such a consensus is typically presupposed by scholars, rather than being critically examined by them. By offering macro-historical reflections, this article argues that EU normative power deviates from the Kantian cosmopolitan ideal and in fact replicates the Hobbesian logic of normative homogenization. Renouncing the medieval Vatican’s ambition to construct a united Europe anchored in uniform normativity, Kantian theory celebrates multiple normalcy as the basis for human freedom, perpetual peace, and mutual transformation. In contrast, Hobbesian theory is driven by the conviction that a peaceful value-based community could be built only through normative homogenization, behavioural conformism, and moral unity. In Hobbesian theory, the Leviathan exercises a transformative power to socialize others, eliminate discords, and build a commonwealth through norm diffusion and public education. In this vein, the EU’s aspiration to build a normatively homogenous Europe seems to reflect Hobbes’s vision of normative unity, rather than Kant’s vision of cosmopolitan diversity. Should the EU aspire to pursue a cosmopolitan foreign policy, it needs to pay more attention to the power-political implications of its drive toward normative homogenization and shift its focus from socialization to mutual transformation.

Is IR Theory White? Racialised Subject-Positioning in Three Canonical Texts

Racism is a historically specific structure of modern global power which generates hierarchies of the human and affirms White supremacy. This has far-reaching material and epistemological consequences in the present, one of which is the production and naturalisation of White-racialised subject positions in academic discourse. This article develops a framework for analysing Whiteness through subject-positioning, synthesising insights from critical race scholarship that seek to dismantle its epistemological tendencies. This framework identifies White subject-positioning as patterned by interlocking epistemologies of immanence, ignorance, and innocence. The article then interrogates how these epistemological tendencies produce limitations and contradictions in international theory through an analysis of three seminal and canonical texts: Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Politics (1979), Robert Keohane’s After Hegemony (1984) and Alexander Wendt’s Social Theory of International Politics (1999). It shows that these epistemologies produce contradictions and weaknesses within the texts by systematically severing the analysis of the international system and the ‘West’ from its actual imperial conditions of possibility. The article outlines pathways for overcoming these limitations and suggests that continued inattention to the epistemological consequences of race for International Relations (IR) theory is intellectually unsustainable.

Colonialism, genocide and International Relations: the Namibian–German case and struggles for restorative relations

The case of the first genocide of the 20th century, committed by German colonial troops against Ovaherero and Nama peoples in what is today Namibia, poses a significant ethical and political challenge not only in practice but also for International Relations theory and theorising. We develop our critical analysis by building on postcolonial critiques of eurocentrism in IR and world politics, and on critical historiographies of the discipline. In particular, we show how the bedrock of dominant international institutional arrangements in the early 20th century rests on a normative inversion, which can be explicated clearly in the context of the Ovaherero and Nama experiences. The normative inversion is manifested in the claims to supreme moral authority for continued European colonial rule in the aftermath of genocidal violence. While the League of Nations (LoN), and the legacies of imperialism have increasingly been addressed in historiographies of IR, neither this normative inversion, nor its political implications have been explicated in the way we pursue this here. Through the lens of our case, we argue that how IR and IR theory conventionally conceive of the international political order is not plausible or justifiable in light of the normative inversion. The struggles for justice and restorative relations by Ovaherero and Nama peoples draw attention to necessary shifts in political practices. The case signals the need for a more fundamental rethinking of premises in international political theory, and of global public political history. This can be meaningfully addressed by acknowledging and explicitly processing the implications of the normative inversion, its antecedent conditions, and its continuing presence in world ordering.

China's Normative Foreign Policy and Its Multilateral Engagement in Asia

This paper focuses on the normative aspect of Chinese foreign policy, whereby China strives to promote its norms, values, and rules in the international arena. Drawing on the relational theory of international politics, normative foreign policy (NFP) is re‐conceptualized by addressing the ontological foundation of international relations. In this light, China's role as an NFP actor is elaborated, based on its cultural traditions and international experience. The paper argues that in contrast with the West's emphasis on substantive norms of universality, Chinese norms are relational; they stress the importance of creating and maintaining ties in international relations. Furthermore, through its international relations, China has implemented an implicit and explicit normative agenda as part of its foreign policy. To further elaborate on this argument, China's multilateral regional diplomacy towards its neighboring regions, in particular Central Asia, is considered. It is concluded that China's NFP both challenges and is challenged by other actors through their constant interaction. This finding has broad implications for contemporary international relations.

Contextual Critical Theory: Revisiting the Historical Mode of Thought

Combining a theoretical genealogy and a model for the future, Critical International Theory presents a reflexive agenda for international relations (IR). Its intellectual narrative traces critical theory from its roots to the present, and situates the development of critical theory within the wider ascendance of IR theory since the 1950s. Devetak emphatically seeks to avoid a mere description of its emergence, however; his work first and foremost reappraises the archetypal ideas and theorists in critical IR. It also offers a framework for a “contextualist” mode of historical thought, in contrast to a dialectical–philosophical mode that appeals to a sense of universal reason, or a constructivist mode that interprets history through a given theoretical lens. Differentiating these modes and justifying one strain over another demands understanding the origins of each. The first chapter fixes the beginning of the relevant intellectual history within IR at the dawn of the second “great debate”; conflict between classicists and advocates of a positivist methodology, derived from the natural sciences, planted the seeds of critical theory. Devetak argues that critical theory's stature in the discipline emerged in this era, as the parties to the debate sought to elevate the discipline through theoretical abstraction. Thus, the narrative of this period begins with the methodological disputes (methodenstreit) of the 1950s and closes with the release of Waltz's Theory of International Politics, noting the wide adoption of abstraction and theorizing—even by its opponents. Alongside the classicist perspectives of Hans Morgenthau and Hedley Bull, critical theory became such an opponent to positivism within the broader methodological dispute.

The limits of power: Knowledge, ethics, and foreign policy in Hans J. Morgenthau’s international theory

Hans J. Morgenthau’s contribution to international relations and political theory appears to have been fully recognized to date. However, his ideas have undergone surprisingly little comprehensive investigation: an attitude that made it possible to grasp only a few aspects of his reflections. The main argument of this article is that the main area of inquiry in Morgenthau’s scholarship – international politics and foreign policy – is based on general considerations regarding the role of reason in politics and the limits of knowledge of the social universe. Not only does the question of the possibility of such knowledge lie at the root of his considerations on political action, but it also forms the mainspring of his reflection on ethics. Through an inquiry into the red thread that tightly links his diverse body of thought on social sciences, ethics, and foreign policy, the article aims to show that Morgenthau was a systematic political thinker who set out from theoretical observations on the limits of knowledge to develop particular insights into ethics and, from there, a particular notion of how foreign policy should be conducted. In other words, Morgenthau established links of essential continuity between knowledge, ethics, and action.

Alternatives to the State: Or, Why a Non-Western IR Must Be a Revolutionary Science

The idea of the sovereign state is at the core of the Western understanding of international politics. If we are serious about coming up with non-Western theories of international politics, it is the state that must be questioned. This article suggests some ways in which this can be done. Only once we have unthought the state can we reconstruct international politics as a more equitable, and peaceful, world order.

THE LIMITS OF ECONOMIC INTERDEPENDENCE: THE CASE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND CHINA

China's rapid economic growth and integration into the global economies have largely significant economic impacts and political implications for the EU. Since China’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO), the flows of trade have expanded substantially. Building on long-existing relations, the EU has established links with China since the 1970s. Over the past decades, the relationship between China and the EU has thus evolved into comprehensive strategic partnership. Both parties have employed several strategies such as summit diplomacy, bilateral approaches, multilateral cooperation, policy papers to improve ties and overcome growing concerns. Economic interests have remained primary. After an overview of the historical evolution of political relations, this paper considers the three main motives which may drive China to provide economic relations with the EU, such as granting the market economy status, the needs of the foreign direct investments (FDI), growth in the volume of trade. The last part of the paper examines the interests and dilemmas of the China- EU economic relationship using the neoliberal theory of international politics as a framework for analysis. With this last point in mind, this paper attempts to analyse the relationship between interdependence and conflict with case studies.

The Historiography of China’s “Rise”: A Struggle for Narrative Autonomy in IR Theory

ABSTRACT The story of International Relations (IR) has always been recounted with a language endemic to the Anglo-liberal political and international experience. This vernacular depicts all states as self-interested expansionists seeking to either promote or antagonise the liberal international order. To advance the meta-theoretical debate on cultural pluralism in IR, this article explores the projection of liberal ontological paradigms onto the historiography of China’s “rise”. The narrative frames from “theories of foreign policy” depict China as a rational calculator seeking material maximisation. The narrative frames from “theories of international politics” depict China as a revisionist state to be evaluated, managed and contained according to the standards set by Anglo-liberal orthodoxy. This article explores China’s “rise” as a struggle for narrative autonomy: a mission to identify and express itself in its own terms. In IR theory, this struggle manifests itself in the concepts of wangquan, zhongyong and tianxia that articulate China’s political and international experience using an indigenous vernacular. By situating these different perspectives in a context of cultural relativity, we provide a conceptual detour around the conventional binary discourse that regulates the present debate: one that seeks to acknowledge ontological difference without descending into historiographical antagonism.

A Study on Domestic Politics and International Relations

A significant and growing literature on international relations (IR) argues that domestic politics is typically an important part of the explanation for states’ foreign policies, and seeks to understand its influence more precisely. I argue that what constitutes a “domestic-political” explanation of a state’s foreign policy choices has not been clearly elaborated. What counts as a domestic-political explanation is defined by opposition to systemic or structural explanations. But these may be specified in several different ways—I spell out two—each of which implies a different concept of domestic political explanations. If a systemic IR theory pictures states as unitary, rational actors, then a domestic-political explanation is one in which domestic political interactions in at least one state yield a suboptimal foreign policy relative to some normative standard. Or, if a systemic IR theory pictures states as unitary, rational actors and also requires that attributes of particular states not enter the explanation, then a domestic-political explanation is any one that involves state characteristics other than relative power. Implications of each approach are developed, and examples from the literature are provided. I also address the question of whether there is a sharp distinction between a “systemic theory of international politics” and a “theory of foreign policy,” arguing that there is an important and natural sense in which they are the same.

Technology, Law, and Annihilation: Carl Schmitt's Critique of Utopianism.

By drawing from Schmitt's postwar notebooks, this article reconstructs Schmitt's criticism of utopian political thought as part of his broader critique of technicity. This paper begins with Schmitt's conceptual history of utopianism within the context of two "de-localizations" of space and human nature. It then unearths Schmitt's unique understanding of utopia as the annihilation of space and the negation of law. Schmitt's concern with utopianism is revealed to lie at the center of his postwar thought and thereby offers a new prism through which to interpret his theory of international politics and the law of nations.