Sovereignty, survival and the Westphalian blind alley in International Relations

1999 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAREL PAUL
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
The State ◽  
Ontological Status ◽  
Blind Alley ◽  
Life And Death ◽  
The Core ◽  
Dead End ◽  
State Survival

That states are sovereign units interacting under conditions of anarchy has long been the core assumption of the discipline of International Relations. Operating largely with an anthropomorphic conceptualization of the state, 'statists' create a stunted ontology of the international system dominated by the concepts of state survival and an assumed state survival interest. By constituting sharp lines of demarcation between being and non-being, between 'life' and 'death', statists ignore a host of more subtle changes in the ontological status of states which are ill-treated by reference to 'survival'. This Westphalian ontology leads ultimately to a dead end, for such a definition rejects from the outset an ontology of overlapping political authorities in a single territory but at distinct scales which is characteristic not only of the present international system but of the so-called Westphalian era as well.

scholarly journals La politique étrangère : État des travaux scientifiques

2005 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 815-845
Author(s):  
André Donneur ◽  
Onnig Beylerian
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
The State ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
Dead End ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Natural Difference

Theoretical studies of foreign policy show that the very subject of the discipline is highly undefined. This is the reason why we shall try, first and foremost, to provide an answer to three fundamental questions. Is there a natural difference between foreign policy and decision-making, or is foreign policy only a sum total of decisions? Is there a difference between a foreign policy which dictates the major general trends and the various policies which apply to restricted scenes of action ? What is the difference between the objectives which actors assign to various policies and their implementation in the international System, thus making their evaluation a problem ? We then deal with the state of studies entered upon by three schools of thought and set down the results registered by the behaviorist trend, the theoretical dilemma it had to face and the dead end it led to. The second trend, historical and political, has, for its part, dealt with comparative analysis of historical cases according to the method of localized and structured comparison. Finally, the third trend, historical, economical and structuralist, has resorted to the world System paradigm of I. Wallerstein. The problem of this paradigm is the transposition of the debate between the supporters of the Annales school (structural serial history, economical and social contingencies) and the historians of international relations (who favour history of events and the role of the state). This approach also focuses on the debate about the dichotomy international relations/transnational relations. In the ends, rigorous and interdisciplinary research studies is deemed necessary for the promotion of studies in foreign policy.

The position of the State in the international system from the perspective of major schools of thought in international relations

2019 ◽  
pp. 79
Author(s):  
Salah Hassan Mohammed ◽  
Mahaa Ahmed Al-Mawla
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Politics ◽  
International System ◽  
International Order ◽  
The State ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Status ◽  
Future Vision

The Study is based on the state as one of the main pillars in international politics. In additions, it tackles its position in the international order from the major schools perspectives in international relations, Especially, these schools differ in the status and priorities of the state according to its priorities, also, each scholar has a different point of view. The research is dedicated to providing a future vision of the state's position in the international order in which based on the vision of the major schools in international relations.

Ethics and Sovereignty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Weinert
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
The State ◽  
International Norms ◽  
Ir Theory ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
The Core ◽  
New Literature ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Power And Authority

Literature concentrated on sovereignty’s location laid the groundwork for the distinctive sort of ethical detachment that has characterized sovereignty in international relations (IR). While it is customary to refer to sovereign absolutism as linking a logic of prerogative with sovereignty, mainstream IR theory has reproduced its own variation on the theme and done little until recently to decouple the two. Yet beginning in the late 1970s, the literature began to entertain the idea that interdependence and globalization impede, constrain, corrode, or diminish the core assumptions of sovereignty: the centralization of power and authority, the supremacy of the state, the state’s capabilities to achieve its objectives, and the degree of permissiveness afforded by an anarchical system. Put differently, the space within which sovereignty could operate unencumbered rapidly diminished in size and scope, and the sovereign state, by losing control over various functions, was becoming incoherent at minimum, and irrelevant at maximum. If these arguments focused on a narrow question, then a new literature emerged in the mid to late 1990s that focused on, and questioned, sovereignty as authority. Moreover, the debates about globalization underscored sovereignty’s disjunctive nature. Yet by linking it so closely with material structures and factors, the literature generally elided consideration of the constitutive effect of international norms on sovereignty and the ways the institution of sovereignty has changed over time.

Theorising the international system: perspectives from Historical Sociology

1999 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEPHEN HOBDEN
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
State Formation ◽  
International System ◽  
Historical Sociology ◽  
The State ◽  
Historical Account ◽  
International Context ◽  
Recent Interest ◽  
State Context ◽  
Inter State

Recent interest in the work of Historical Sociologists has concentrated on their renewed interest in the state. There is considerable regard for the historical account of state formation and development produced by writers such as Mann, Skocpol and Tilly. Surprisingly there has been less attention paid to another feature of their writings—the locating of states in an inter-state context. This article examines the international context envisioned by four historical sociologists. It argues that, although these writers have been successful at historicising state formations, this powerful account has not been matched with a historical account of international relations. If this project is to move forward, a complementary historical account of international contexts, or global structures, is required.

Liberalism and Security

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Owen IV
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
The State ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
International Interaction ◽  
The Individual

Liberalism has always been concerned with security, albeit the security of the individual; institutions, including the state, are all established and sustained by individuals and instrumental to their desires. Indeed, liberalism cannot be understood apart from its normative commitment to individualism. The tradition insists that all persons deserve, and it evaluates institutions according to how far they help individuals achieve these goals. Nor is liberalism anti-statist. Liberal theory has paid particular attention to the state as the institution defined by its ability to make individuals secure and aid their commodious living. Although liberal security literature that only examines individual states’ foreign policies may be guilty of denouncing the role of international interaction, the general liberal claim argues that the international system, under broad conditions, permits states choices. As such, for liberalism, states can choose over time to create and sustain international conditions under which they will be more or less secure. Liberalism’s history can be traced from the proto-liberalism in the Reformation to the emergence of the social contract theory and neo-theories, as well as liberalism’s focus on increasing security. Meanwhile, current debates in liberalism include the democratic peace and its progeny, reformulations of liberal international relations (IR) theory, and meta-theory. Ultimately, liberalism’s most striking recent successes concern the democratic peace and related research on democratic advantages in international cooperation. Liberalism is a useful guide to international security insofar as individuals and the groups they organize affect or erode states.

Articulations of Sovereignty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Aradau
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Social Space ◽  
International System ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Construct ◽  
Community Politics ◽  
Spatio Temporal ◽  
The Given

Sovereignty has been variously understood as the given principle of international relations, an institution, a social construct, a performative discourse subject to historical transformation, or a particular practice of power. The “articulations” of sovereignty refer to sovereignty as a practice that is worked on and in turn works with and against other practices. Alongside territory and supreme authority, sovereignty is characterized by the capacity to make and enforce laws. Sovereignty has also been defined in opposition to rights, as the spatiotemporal limits it instantiates are also the limits of rights. Another conceptualization of sovereignty has been revived in international relations, partly in response to the question of exclusions and limits that sovereign practices enacted. In addition, sovereignty is not inextricably tied up with the state but is articulated with heterogeneous and contradictory discourses and practices that create meaning about the international, and has consequences for the kind of community, politics, and agency that are possible. There are three effects of the logic of sovereignty in the international system: the ordering of the domestic and the international, the spatio-temporal limits to politics, and the exclusions from agency. In addition, there are three renditions of the international as a “thick” social space: those of globalization theories, of biopolitics, and of empire.

The Future of International System

1976 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-213
Author(s):  
James A. Nathan
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Behavior ◽  
Moral Obligation ◽  
International System ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Interaction ◽  
Military Policy ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Future

There are at least three ways we can describe international political behavior: (1) We can view international relations as taking place in an arena marked by military competition for the scarce commodity named security; (2) we can see international political behavior as a complex set of human interaction, where the ‘high politics’ of military policy is being eroded by the increasing stalemate of power and the emergence of global interdependencies; and (3) we can see international politics as an arena of moral obligation. Each of these views implies a different prognosis of the future. A future world based on power seems, however, little likely, given the diminishing utility of the state to serve traditional security ends and the erosion of the use of force. An increasingly interdependent world is possible, but there is no governmental structure presently developing which seems likely to manage these dependencies. And there is little likelihood the third view will receive sufficient institutional sustenance.

scholarly journals Power and Ideology: Vladimir Putin and the Russian Political System

2008 ◽  
pp. 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred B. Evans
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Political System ◽  
International System ◽  
The State ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
The Core ◽  
Vladimir Putin ◽  
The Relationship

This paper explores the ideas that have been offered by the Putin leadership in Russia to justify the concentration of power achieved since 2000. Though Vladimir Putin has said that Russia does not need a state ideology, since early 2006 some officials associated with Putin, including Vladislav Surkov, have called for an ideology for the dominant United Russia Party, and have asserted that Putin’s speeches provide the core of that ideology. This essay discusses Putin’s position on Russia’s commitment to democracy, the relationship between Russia and Europe, and the nature of the international system in which Russia fi nds itself. The author sees the concept of “sovereign democracy” that has been offered by Surkov and endorsed by United Russia as summarizing ideas that already had been articulated by Putin. Putin’s words strongly emphasize the importance of a consensus of values in Russian society and politics. That theme has important implications for the relationship between the state and civil society in Russia. Evans argues that the ideological pronouncements of the Putin leadership refl ect tension between apparently inconsistent principles resulting from a combination of inherently contradictory themes. Putin identifi es the main danger facing Russia in the contemporary period as disintegration rather than stagnation.

scholarly journals Atores não-estatais e meio ambiente nas relações internacionais: Greenpeace e a Antártica

2001 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael A. Duarte VILLA
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
Environmental Issues ◽  
The State ◽  
Environmental Groups ◽  
Main Hypothesis ◽  
Realistic Approach ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Antarctic

O artigo analisa a crescente importância que vem tomando nas relações internacionais os atores nãoestatais transnacionais. Especificamente, o autor explora o caso dos atores ecológicos através de um estudo de caso: a ação do grupo Greenpeace na Antártica na década de 80. A hipótese central da pesquisa é que os atores não-estatais transnacionais, a exemplo dos grupos ecológicos, revisam a noção do enfoque realista da política internacional segundo a qual o monopólio das relações internacionais pertence ao Estado nacional. Congruente com tal hipótese, a emergência do ator não-estatal ecológico vai no sentido de questionar essa noção e abrir espaço para o surgimento de um sistema internacional plural quanto a seus atores e sua agenda de questões. A conclusão aponta para um envolvimento cada vez mais crescente, no nível internacional e nacional, desse tipo de ator não-estatal em arenas diferenciadas da dimensão estratégico-militar. Este estudo foi feito com base na interação desse grupo ecológico com o sistema de estados reunidos em torno do Tratado Antártico. Actors who not pertain to the state, and dealing with environmental issues in international relations: Greenpeace and the Antarctic Abstract This article analyses the growing importance transnational, non-statal actors has taken in international relationships. Specifically, the author explores the case of environmental actors discussing a case study: Greenpeace’s action in Antarctic, during the 1980’s. The main hypothesis states that transnational, non-statal actors, just like environmental groups, forces a reviewing of the realistic approach to the theory of international relationships, according to whom the monopoly of those international relationships belongs to the national State. According to that hypothesis, the emergence of transnational, non-statal actors defies the realistic notion, and opens space for an international system that is plural for its actors and agenda. The conclusion sets for a growing commitment, at national and international levels, for that kind of non-statal actor, in an arena different from the stractegic-military one. So, this study has been made considering the interaction of Greenpeace and the State system organized to the Antarctic Treaty.

Societies, states and geopolitics: challenges from historical sociology

1989 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Jarvis
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
Historical Sociology ◽  
The State ◽  
Classical Realism

Many scholars in International Relations will register surprise and perhaps amusement at the recent 'discovery' of the state by sociologists. They could accurately claim, it has never been similarly neglected in their own discipline. International Relations is about states and the system of states. Classical realism relies on explicit understandings about what states are and their place in the international system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document