Traversing the Romance of a Liberal International Order: The Democratic Peace Thesis and the Regional Security Problematique in South Asia

2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 344-360
Author(s):  
Sanjeev Kumar H. M.
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
South Asia ◽  
International System ◽  
International Order ◽  
Regional Security ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Moral High Ground

The democratic peace hypothesis, which is embedded in the neo-Kantian romance of liberal cosmopolitan idealism, was framed in the spatiotemporal context of the Cold War bipolarity. Michael Doyle, who is one of its proponents, invoked the Kantian philosophical abstraction of ‘the perpetual peace’ by providing an intellectual defence and moral high ground for the values of the Liberal Capitalist world. In the post–Cold War setting, Francis Fukuyama re-casted the hypothesis and portrayed the triumph of liberal international order as ‘the end of history’. He attempted to reframe the democratic peace thesis, not only to celebrate liberal values as the normative exemplar for ordering a post–Cold War international system but also to provide an intellectual defence for the newly emerging space for American leadership in a post-hegemonic international system. This intellectual defence of the ethical supremacy of liberal idealism in the world, shaped by the leadership of the USA, was entrenched in the epistemological Imperialism of the West. Besides, it also reflected an exclusionary idea of the history of international relations that was heavily grounded in the chronology of the post-Westphalia international order. Situating ourselves in this framework, this article is an attempt to critique the epistemic foundations of the democratic peace hypothesis, by deconstructing its assertions in the geostrategic context of the regional security architecture in South Asia. The article criticizes the democratic peace thesis, using an analysis of the Kargil conflict (1999) between India and Pakistan, and by placing ourselves in the epistemological framework of the historical turn in international relations.

Diplomacy and War

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Weiner ◽  
Paul Sharp
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Order ◽  
Nuclear War ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Military Diplomacy ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Invasion Of Iraq

Scholars acknowledge that there is a close connection between diplomacy and war, but they disagree with regard to the character of this connection—what it is and what it ought to be. In general, diplomacy and war are assumed to be antagonistic and polar opposites. In contrast, the present diplomatic system is founded on the view that state interests may be pursued, international order maintained, and changes effected in it by both diplomacy and war as two faces of a single statecraft. To understand the relationships between diplomacy and war, we must look at the development of the contemporary state system and the evolution of warfare and diplomacy within it. In this context, one important claim is that the foundations of international organizations in general, and the League of Nations in particular, rest on a critique of modern (or “old”) diplomacy. For much of the Cold War, the intellectual currents favored the idea of avoiding nuclear war to gain advantage. In the post-Cold War era, the relationship between diplomacy and war remained essentially the same, with concepts such as “humanitarian intervention” and “military diplomacy” capturing the idea of a new international order. The shocks to the international system caused by events between the terrorist attacks on the United States in 2001 and the invasion of Iraq in 2003 have intensified the paradoxes of the relationship between diplomacy and war.

scholarly journals Global History and International Relations:

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anelise Freitas Pereira Gondar ◽  
Aline Duarte da Graça Rizzo
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Latin American ◽  
International System ◽  
World Order ◽  
Global History ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
American Perspective ◽  
Definition Of

The Post-Cold War world order fueled discussions in the field of Humanities on theoretical and methodological resources in the very attempt to understand and explain the increasingly multi-polarized and complex international system. While considering the field of History — especially in its attempt to theoretically and methodologically cross borders — and while being active in the field of International Relations, we see possibilities of fruitful encounters between both areas of research, particularly when it comes to recent discussions on what came to be called in the 1990s “global history”. The article initially presents a conceptual definition of global history; then moves on to underpin its claim that History and IR areentangled disciplines that, despite different theoretical points of departure, not only share similar basic assumptions (state-centrism and the Western intellectual framework of thought) but also have been sharing similar intellectual preoccupations. In the third part, we explore possibilities of writing global history from the Latin-American perspective by discussing three recent contributions to the field. Finally, the text briefly enunciates possibilities of mutual enlightenment between the disciplinary fields of History and IR based on the idea of Global IR.

The foreign policy options of a small unrecognised state: the case of Abkhazia

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Thomas Frear
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
Policy Options ◽  
Universal Principle ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Significant Challenge ◽  
The World ◽  
Systemic Understanding

The study of international relations has historically focused on the activities of large, powerful states, dismissing the smaller entities of the international system as unimportant or merely objects of policy for the larger entities. This truism extends especially to those entities that exist in an unrecognised or partially recognised limbo, neither a full part of the international system nor an ungoverned space. Yet in the post-Cold War world, following the dissolution of large multi-national states such as the USSR, these entities have begun to proliferate. This proliferation provides a significant challenge to an international system in which the primary participants are states, and to the institutions created to oversee their interaction. Unrecognised entities, existing outside of this framework, represent a threat to the universal principle of sovereignty, that one true institutionalised aspect of international relations. As such the study of these entities and their interaction with the world outside their borders is a study important for a systemic understanding of contemporary international relations. This article aims to address the foreign policy of one such entity, Abkhazia.

scholarly journals Structural Constraints and Human Agency in Global Summitry and the Liberal Order

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan S Alexandroff ◽  
Arthur A Stein
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
World War I ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International Politics ◽  
International System ◽  
International Order ◽  
Structural Constraints ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
The Many ◽  
Power And Agency

Abstract Confusion surrounds how best to describe today the architecture of the liberal international order, its challenges, and prospects. The Liberal Order’s various and changing configurations its distributions of power, as well as the variety of major actors, portend consequences for the operation of the international system. Although structural approaches remain dominant in international relations analysis, it is evident that there is an interaction of structure, the distribution, and redistribution of power, and agency—the diplomatic actions, norms, and rules of international politics. Historical and existing institutions, ongoing debates, and political efforts all point to the role of agency in global governance. The ongoing search for order was the basis for the Peace of Westphalia, the Concert of Europe, the effort to construct collective security following World War I, the Western liberal order of the Cold War, and global governance constructions of the post-Cold War era. The continuing existence and direction of the liberal international order are proving difficult to determine. There are rising powers and growing geopolitical rivalry. There are many new nonstate actors affecting international politics. And, there is current U.S. policy that puts in question its collaborative role and its continuing leadership. The many architectures of global governance, even competing ones, underline that structure alone is not determinative. In addition, debates over what course to take imply that the force of circumstance does not make one and only choice possible and inevitable, and that the search for order is ongoing and omnipresent.

scholarly journals Conceptual Fundamentals of Post-Westphalian International Relations

2020 ◽  
Vol 12(48) (4) ◽  
pp. 69-85
Author(s):  
Alla Kyrydon ◽  
Sergiy Troyan
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
International Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Soviet Bloc ◽  
Structure Changes ◽  
The World ◽  
The Cold War

Conceptual approaches to understanding the current stage of the evolution of international relations were put in place during the destruction of the bipolar world of the Cold War and the formation of new foundations of the world and international order. The distinctiveness of this process is that the collapse of the postwar system took place in peaceful conditions. Most often, two terms are used to describe the interconnectedness and interdependence of world politics after the fall of the Iron Curtain: the post-bipolar (post-westphalian) international system or international relations after the end of the Cold War. Two terms, post-bipolar international system and international relations after the end of the Cold War, have common features, which usually allows them to be used as synonyms and makes them the most popular when choosing a common comprehensive definition for the modern international relations. The collapse of the Soviet bloc and the global bipolar system put on the agenda issues that cannot be resolved within the traditional terms “poles,” “balance of power,” “configuration of the balance of power” etc. The world has entered a period of uncertainty and growing risks. the global international system is experiencing profound shocks associated with the transformation of its structure, changes in its interaction with the environment, which accordingly affects its regional and peripheral dimensions. In modern post-bipolar relations of shaky equilibrium, there is an obvious focus on the transformation of the world international order into a “post-American world” with the critical dynamics of relations between old and new actors at the global level. The question of the further evolution of the entire system of international relations in the post-bipolar world and the tendency of its transformation from a confrontational to a system of cooperation remains open.

scholarly journals The Beginning of the Post-modern Geopolitical Epoch and the Peculiarities of the System of Contemporary International Relations in the 21st Century

2019 ◽  
pp. 111-118
Author(s):  
George Zviadadze
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
International System ◽  
World Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Order System ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
The World ◽  
Characteristic Features

After transformation of unipolarity and reformatting world order system, a question been forwarded on how new system is to be founded on. As it is known classical international relations system developed since Westphalia Agreement of 1648 has been composed mainly by the state as key actors of international politics. The system has been developed two type of regimes: soft bipolarity and balance of power interchanged in several period of time consequently. One of the characteristic features of globalization is a fundamental change of the international system and world order. It differs from the world of post-Cold War period with the stance of different actors of international relations on each other as well as with the forms of sharing power and that of interconnections. In that context there were four phases of the international relations systems: the system of Westphalia, the system of Vienna, the system of Versailles, the system of Yalta-Potsdam and later international relations were transformed into bipolarity one. Since demolishing classical Cold War order and entering into new epoch of anarchic scenario, the states as key actors of the system have been diminishing in favour of so-called “nonstate actors”. However, in the international system of the 21st century, the nationstate still has particular functions. It represents the dominant element of the world politics which can influence the behaviour of the population and non-state actors.

scholarly journals The India-Pakistani Military and Nuclear Arms Race in Post-Cold War Period: The Regional Security Complex in South Asia

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 165
Author(s):  
Arfin Sudirman
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
South Asia ◽  
Nuclear Material ◽  
Arms Race ◽  
Regional Security ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
Terrorist Groups ◽  
Nuclear Arms Race ◽  
Nuclear Arms

The article examines the India-Pakistani nuclear arms race and its effect to the regional security in South Asia today as a Cold War’s legacy. By using regional security complex theory and qualitative method, this article argues that the balance of power and security dilemma principles also work in the region level due to the fact that both countries use nuclear weapons as a deterrence power, a similar pattern that also occurred during the Cold War era. External power such as US, China and Russia are actually aggravating the situation by selling the nuclear material (such as uranium) and technology to both countries regardless the future consequence. However, since multipolar system gives level of threat into more complex and broader sectors of security issues-not to mention the existence of non state actors such as terrorist groups, the regional security in South Asia is essential to prevent further damage to the nearby region. Therefore, the role of international community such as the UN to restore order in the regions is vital.

scholarly journals FORMATION OF THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE U.S. FOREIGN POLICY AT THE END OF THE XX CENTURY

2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
G.M. Kakenova ◽  
Z.А. Kakenova
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
Democratic Values ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Theoretical Foundations ◽  
The U.S

The article discusses approaches to the study of the theoretical foundations of the U.S. foreign policy. For decades, the United States has been one of the most important actors in international relations. The post-Cold War period is one of the most important periods in the U.S. foreign policy. At this time, scholars also debate the new role of the United States in the structure of international relations. Singling out the United States as the only center of power, American researchers supported the idea of a “unipolar” world. The ideas of American scholars and researchers dominated the words of American political leaders of the time: the United States is a world leader, and its mission is to establish a new international political and economic order based on liberal democratic values. The ideas of spreading democratic values and the theory of a democratic peace have had a significant impact on the formation and development of the U.S. foreign policy after the Cold War. The article examines the content and essence of these theories, their basic principles, and the reflection of these theories in the foreign policy of the United States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document