International Religious Freedom

Author(s):  
Gregorio Bettiza

The chapter identifies the constellation of desecularizing actors embedded in postsecular processes responsible for the institutionalization and evolution of the International Religious Freedom regime since the late 1990s. It then investigates the main institutions and practices of the regime and their evolution over time. The chapter suggests that processes of desecularization that underpin this regime are opening up greater spaces for the organized and sustained inclusion, reification, positive essentialization, and normative accommodation of religion in US foreign policy. In terms of global effects, the IRF regime advances a radically pluralist cum Protestant particularist understanding of what constitutes religion and religious freedom; contributes to the religionization of world politics through mechanisms of elevation and categorization; and promotes the adoption of similar policies around the world. The conclusion summarizes the main findings and reflects on developments taking place under President Trump.

2001 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Ned Lebow ◽  
Robert Kelly

Fifth century Greeks distinguished between hegemonia (legitimated leadership) and arkhe (control). Thucydides employed this distinction to track the changing nature of the Athenian Empire during the Peloponnesian War, and the ways in which a diminishing concern for balancing self-interest against justice corroded Athenian authority, made survival of the empire increasingly problematic and encouraged the disastrous expedition to Sicily. The Melian Dialogue—often cited by realists to justify a power-based approach to foreign policy—is intended to symbolize this decay. Building on our analysis of Thucydides, we examine the British, Soviet and American experiences with hegemony. A striking feature of the contemporary American situation is the extent to which American leaders claim hegemonia but deny any interest in arkhe. Rightly or wrongly, much of the rest of the world has the reverse perception. This seeming contradiction has important implications for US foreign policy and world politics more generally.


Author(s):  
David M. Malone ◽  
C. Raja Mohan ◽  
Srinath Raghavan

India has emerged as a leading voice in global affairs in the past two decades. Its fast-growing domestic market largely explains the ardour with which Delhi is courted by powers great and small. India is also becoming increasingly important to global geostrategic calculations, being the only Asian country with the heft to counterbalance China over time. Nevertheless, India’s foreign policy has been relatively neglected in the existing literature. ThisHandbook, edited by three widely recognized students of the topic, provides an extensive survey of India’s external relations. The authors include leading Indian scholars and commentators of the field and several outstanding foreign scholars and practitioners. They address factors in Indian foreign policy flowing from both history and geography and also discuss key relationships, issues, and multilateral forums through which the country’s international relations are refracted.


2021 ◽  
pp. 127-161
Author(s):  
Dennis Niemann

AbstractIn Chap. 10.1007/978-3-030-78885-8_5, Dennis Niemann analyzes international organizations (IOs) and their education ideas. Different ideological paradigms dominated the global education discourse at different periods. Fundamentally, they revolve around two poles of an economic utilitarian view on education and on an interpretation that emphasizes the social and cultural value of education. Both leitmotifs were influenced by general developments in world politics, and they were also reflected within IOs. Niemann analyzes how global education IOs, specifically the World Bank, the OECD, UNESCO, and the ILO, influenced the global discourse on education. First, he argues that within the IOs, the antipodal views on education became more complementary over time. Second, he demonstrates the pattern of interaction between the IOs has also changed from competition to cooperation.


1980 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Barber

There is no better known judgement of Britain's post-war international position than Dean Acheson's view that: “Britain has lost an Empire and has not yet found a role”. Acheson's words have echoed and reechoed through the corridors of Whitehall because they seem so true, capturing not only the uncertainty about Britain's role but the decline in her international status. The judgement has attracted the attention of scholars as well as officials and politicians, as was demonstrated in a recent number of this journal when Christopher Hill wrote about “Britain's Elusive Role in World Politics”. Hill warned against the dangers of seeing foreign policy making in terms of “role”, arguing that it suppressed contradictions in the interests of a predominant image, and encouraged the illusion that a state could plough a lone furrow in pursuit of its particular interests. “Unfortunately”, he argued, “the quest for a unique role, like the pursuit of the Holy Grail, is a fatal distraction to politicians with responsibility”, and later he warned of “role” degenerating into “the medium of limp metaphor and rhetoric”.


Author(s):  
Gregorio Bettiza

The chapter presents the book’s theoretical framework, which is grounded in a sociological approach to international relations (IR) theory. It suggests that to explain the causes and shape of the operationalization of religion in US foreign policy attention needs to be paid to the combined effects of macro-level forces represented by the emergence of a postsecular world society, and the mobilization at the micro-level of a diverse range of desecularizing actors who seek to contest the secularity of American foreign policy through the deployment of multiple desecularizing discourses. The chapter then conceptualizes four different processes of foreign policy desecularization—institutional, epistemic, ideological, and state-normative—which take place as religion increasingly becomes an organized subject and object of US foreign policy. Finally, it advances three hypotheses about the global effects of America’s religious foreign policies: they shape religious landscapes around the world in ways that reflect American values and interests; they contribute to religionizing world politics; and they promote similar policies internationally.


Author(s):  
Mark Crescenzi

Reputations abound in world politics, but we know little about how reputations form and evolve: namely, how do countries form reputations? Do these reputations affect interstate politics in the global arena? In this book, Crescenzi develops a theory of reputation dynamics to help identify when reputations form in ways that affect world politics, both in the realms of international conflict and cooperation. A reputation for honoring one’s obligations in a treaty, for example, canmake a state a more attractive ally; on the other hand, a reputation for war and conflict can triggermore of the same, leading to a cycle of violence that exacerbates security challenges. These processes of cooperation and conflict are linked by a common use of the information held in each state’s reputation. In each case, states use reputational information in an attempt to resolve the uncertainty they face when crafting foreign policy decisions. Crescenzi usesablendof historical andempirical analysis to show how reputations matter in world politics, demonstrating that over time and across the globe, reputations for conflict exacerbate crises, while reputations for cooperation and reliability make future cooperation more likely.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document