scholarly journals Politics and theory of global governance

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Orfeo Fioretos ◽  
Jonas Tallberg

Abstract At a point when global governance appears to be at a crossroad, caught between globalizing and national populist forces, International Relations theorists are deeply immersed in debating what brought the world to this point. This contribution enlists Michael Zürn's A Theory of Global Governance (2018) to explore the state of global governance theory through a focus on three substantive themes: authority, legitimacy, and contestation in global governance. It identifies the current state of theorizing on each theme, situates Zürn's claims within these literatures, and previews counterpoints from a variety of theoretical perspectives.

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Orfeo Fioretos ◽  
Jonas Tallberg

Abstract As global governance institutions appear increasingly contested by state and non-state actors alike, understanding their origin, operation, and impact is becoming ever more urgent. This symposium uses Michael Zürn's A Theory of Global Governance: Authority, Legitimacy, and Contestation (OUP, 2018) as a springboard to explore the state of global governance theory. A Theory opens new terrain and advances bold and original arguments, including the contention that global governance is itself best understood as a political system. It analyzes a cycle from rising authority beyond the state through the 20th century, to ensuing legitimation problems toward the century's end, to the politicization and contestation triggered by such problems. A book of such ambition inevitably elicits queries within diverse international relations research communities. This symposium features seven articles from diverse traditions in engagement with A Theory's understanding of global contestation, authority, and legitimacy. These are followed by a response from Zürn. An introduction situates A Theory within extant research on global governance, highlights its endogenous theory of global politics, and identifies the stakes of deepening research on the sources of global authority, contestation, and political legitimation.


Author(s):  
Sean Fleming

States are commonly blamed for wars, called on to apologize, held liable for debts and reparations, bound by treaties, and punished with sanctions. But what does it mean to hold a state responsible as opposed to a government, a nation, or an individual leader? Under what circumstances should we assign responsibility to states rather than individuals? This book demystifies the phenomenon of state responsibility and explains why it is a challenging yet indispensable part of modern politics. Taking Thomas Hobbes' theory of the state as a starting point, the book presents a theory of state responsibility that sheds new light on sovereign debt, historical reparations, treaty obligations, and economic sanctions. Along the way, it overturns longstanding interpretations of Hobbes' political thought, explores how new technologies will alter the practice of state responsibility as we know it, and develops new accounts of political authority, representation, and legitimacy. The book argues that Hobbes' idea of the state offers a far richer and more realistic conception of state responsibility than the theories prevalent today and demonstrates that Hobbes' Leviathan is much more than an anthropomorphic “artificial man.” The book is essential reading for political theorists, scholars of international relations, international lawyers, and philosophers. It recovers a forgotten understanding of state personality in Hobbes' thought and shows how to apply it to the world of imperfect states in which we live.


Author(s):  
Адибекян ◽  
Oganes Adibekyan

Strengthening of world nations merging together within existing states happens along withthe formation of ethnic groups. These foreign parts of nations form for various reasons, but independently the associations of members of these groups have to be in a relationship with a native country as well as with the citizens of their country of resettlement. Self-governing bodies of the Diaspora, authorities of native state and of the state of residence form a triangular system, where each side holds friendliness, or hostility, or indifference. Three components with three different attitudes form different combinations, knowledge and consideration of which in certain cases obtain political significance. Some views are independent of those parties. Some are managed, generated. They are affected by international relations in the world. Variability may Not be excluded. All this is a subject for clarification in specific studies of selected nations and their diaspora, selected countries. The fundamental consideration of the positions of the Diaspora inbetween the authorities of the two countries ismethodologically valuable.


Author(s):  
Andrei Andreevich Kovalev ◽  
Ekaterina Yur'evna Knyazeva

The global governance theories assessment is among the poorly studied problems in Russian political science, though its topicality in the modern age of civilizational confrontation is beyond dispute. Primarily, the necessity to study the key global governance concepts is determined by the need for establishing effective relations with the Western and the Eastern countries. The purpose of the article is to analyze and estimate the main foreig global governance concepts, and it is achieved by solving the following tasks: 1) to consider the main definitions of global governance; 2) to detect the problem of legitimacy in international relations; 3) to consider the legitimacy of global governance. The authors give special attention to the underestimated source of global governance legitimacy - the liberal legal principles. As a political program, global governance is understood as a political and legal aspect of globalization. In recent decades, global governance theories have been adopted as a research program in the field of social sciences. Within the (neo)liberal institutionalism tradition, particularly, the interdependence theories, global governance approaches consider the consolidation of international cooperation and the transformation of the global system in which the anarchical system of sovereign national states is considered as a multilayer system including nongovernmental subjects. The researchers try to model power as “governance” without subjects which  are formally justified and entitled with the use of force monopoly. The future of global governance is connected with effective international law able to timely settle the arising disputes and deter possible aggression which, in the age of civilizational confrontation, can lead to the last war in human history. The effectiveness of global governance depends on what globalization direction the leading civilizations will choose: the force-based American way, or the way taking into account the interests of most peoples of the world.   


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 113-129
Author(s):  
V. A. Avatkov

The article considers the role of ideology and values in the formation and implementation of the current foreign policy of the Republic of Turkey. Taking into account the increasing role of regional actors such as Turkey in international politics, studying their tactics and mechanisms of influence on the global political environment is necessary to explain the further transformation of the international system.The study reveals the strengthening role of the ideology and values in world politics in general and in individual states, such as Turkey, in particular. Under the rule of the Justice and Development Party headed by the current President R.T. Erdogan the country began a gradual transition from «Kemalism», which includes the preservation of secularism, ProWestern democratic values and a gradual departure from the Ottoman heritage, to a more conservative domestic and foreign policy, characterized by the strengthening of Islamist and nationalist sentiments, as well as the transition to the policy of «neo-Ottomanism», «neo-pan-Turkism». The return of the idea of «aggrandizement» of the country to the official political discourse has affected the conduct of Turkey's foreign policy towards both the regional states and the world arena as a whole.The Republic not only began self-restoration as an autonomous actor of international relations in the eyes of the key world powers, but also started to spread its own values and ideas among the population of both the Middle East and among the states which constitute a national interest for Turkey (Russia, the post-Soviet space, etc.), thus influencing them at various levels and involving them in its orbit of influence – both politically, economically and from a humanitarian point of view.Using «hard power» abroad no longer meets the current Turkey’s policy. Instead it relies on forging humanitarian ties, combining initiatives in the cultural, educational and scientific fields to achieve a long-term influence. The Republic of Turkey is trying to spread the following values among the world community:«Justice». International relations must be just and fair. For Turkey it means conformity with its national interests.«Religious fatalism». Government actions both at home and abroad are legitimized through references to religion and fate.«Democratic values». The Republic of Turkey considers itself the most democratic state in the world and contrasts itself with “Western democracies”, which, according to the Turkish leadership, are spreading hegemony rather than democracy.«State-centrism» and collectivism. The interests of the state, society, and especially the Muslim Ummah, are placed above the values of the individual.«Traditional values». Given the Islamization and conservatism of Turkish society as a whole, traditional values also begin to play a major role in the general political discourse of the state.«Culture». Turkey also makes adjustments to the concept of «culture» in very inclusive terms, presenting its culture as a «melting pot» that can turn anything into Turkish.«Respect». In the eastern tradition, it is customary to show respect to elders, as well as neighbors and guests. Turkey uses a demonstration of respect in foreign policy instrumentally and pragmatically. An example of this is the address of the President of Turkey in relation to the leaders of other states: Nursultan Nazarbayev – «aksakal» of the Turkic world, Vladimir Putin is a «dear friend».


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 31-40
Author(s):  
Yana Martianova

The article considers a degree of knowledge and the current state of scientific researche in the problem of functioning in camps of integrated units of Ukrainian Galician Army in Czechoslovakia (Deutsch Gabel, Liberec, Josefov), of a number of magazines (including «Voice of the Camp», «Ukrainian Shooter», «Ukrainian Wanderer» and so on). The materials, published on the pages of the above mentioned camp periodicals, represent a special value as the primary sources of the history of UGA camps. Their study is absolutely necessary for understanding the informative-educational and organizational-mobilization functions of the camp press of interned Ukrainian soldiers in the second half of 1919 – 1923. The journalistic period in the camp of international relations of the UGA in Czechoslovakia has established itself as an effective tool for influencing the world outlook and value orientations of Ukrainian soldiers. The idea of a united fighting for the independence of Ukraine. At the same time, in accordance with these living circumstances, in different living conditions in the conditions of emigration, an adaptation of the interned military personnel took place. The publication of camp periodicals became one of the evidence of a clear understanding by their first colleagues of the tasks and prospects of the Ukrainian liberation movement. Thus, we can easily imagine the daily life of the interned soldiers of the UGA in the camp.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian D. Richards ◽  
Ulf Jakobsson ◽  
David Novák ◽  
Benjamin Štular ◽  
Holly Wright

The articles in this special issue demonstrate significant differences in digital archiving capacity in different countries. In part these reflect differences in the history of archaeology in each country, its relationship to the state, whether it is centralised or decentralised, state-led or commercially driven. They also reflect some of the different attitudes to archaeology across the world, most recently explored in a survey conducted under the auspices of the NEARCH project. They reflect a snapshot in time, but our aim is to record the current state-of-the-art in each country, to inform knowledge, stimulate discussion, and to provoke change.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document