scholarly journals Deem uma Chance à Ideologia – Notas Sobre o Poder Negligenciado nas Relações Internacionais | Give Ideology a Chance – Notes on that Neglected Power in International Relations

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. e39513
Author(s):  
Renato T. Borges
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
International System ◽  
Starting Point

As notas que se seguem visam colaborar com as discussões a respeito do conceito de ideologia e do seu papel na formulação de política externa referentes aos estudos da área de Relações Internacionais. O artigo, uma breve introdução sem qualquer objetivo de esgotamento do tema, aponta as relações existentes entre o conceito abordado e o do nacionalismo, assim como afirma a impossibilidade das tentativas de separação das questões ideológicas do exercício do estadista e das ações do Estado no cenário internacional. As considerações finais ressaltam a importância do estudo da ideologia para a área e reservam um comentário do autor acerca do contexto atual da política (externa) brasileira.Palavras-chave: Ideologia; Nacionalismo; Política Externa.ABSTRACT The notes below are an effort to contribute to the discussions in the area of International Relations concerning the concept of ideology and its role in foreign policy-making. This brief introduction does not exhaust the object, but it intends to be a starting point for new studies on the nexus between ideology and nationalism, or even the indivisibility of the former as a variable in the exercise of statesmanship as well as in the behavior of a state in the international system. The final thoughts underline the importance of the study of ideology in IR and expose some comments about the actual context of Brazilian (foreign) policy.Keywords: Ideology; Nationalism; Foreign Policy.Recebido em 17 jan. 2019 | Aceito em 03 set. 2019

Contesting the “Corrupt Elites,” Creating the “Pure People,” and Renegotiating the Hierarchies of the International Order? Populism and Foreign Policy-Making in Turkey and Hungary

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fulya Hisarlıoğlu ◽  
Lerna K Yanık ◽  
Umut Korkut ◽  
İlke Civelekoğlu
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
International System ◽  
International Order ◽  
Vertical Stratification ◽  
International Level ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Do So

Abstract This article explores the link between populism and hierarchies in international relations by examining the recent foreign policy-making in Turkey and Hungary—two countries run by populist leaders. We argue that when populists bring populism into foreign policy, they do so by contesting the “corrupt elites” of the international order and, simultaneously, attempt to create the “pure people” transnationally. The populists contest the “eliteness” and leadership status of these “elites” and the international order and its institutions, that is, the “establishment,” that these “elites” have come to represent by challenging them both in discourse and in action. The creation of the “pure people” happens by discursively demarcating the “underprivileged” of the international order as a subcategory based on religion and supplementing them with aid, thus mimicking the distributive strategies of populism, this time at the international level. We illustrate that when populist leaders, insert populism into foreign policies of their respective states, through contesting the “corrupt elites” and creating the “pure people,” the built-in vertical stratification mechanisms of populism that stems from the antagonistic binaries inherent to populism provide them with the necessary superiority and inferiority labels allowing them to renegotiate hierarchies in the international system in an attempt to modify the existing ones or to create new ones.

Global Governance in Foreign Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Álvaro Mendez
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Scientific Practice ◽  
International System ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Foreign Policy Analysis ◽  
Multiple Levels ◽  
Social Scientific

Global governance is a story of human agency confronting the existential challenge of the seismic shift in the international system that is called globalization. Neither phenomenon is yet understood sufficiently in academic theory, but if any social scientific practice is best situated to research it to the requisite depth, it is the discipline of foreign policy analysis. The theory and practice of foreign policy making and implementation are bound to undergo a transformation as radical as the international system. This historic process is dissolving the structure of agency that was set by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. The result has been for state and nonstate actors to compensate with a motley assemblage of structural improvisations, which have been complicating international relations, adding multiple levels of agency above and below the classical nation-state. Where this development will ultimately lead is unknown.

scholarly journals Interdependance, linkage et système international : de l'analyse conceptuelle aux problèmes de politique étrangère

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 329-352
Author(s):  
Irnerio Seminatore
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
Political Context ◽  
International Policy ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The North ◽  
Interdependence Theory ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Impact

The emergence and evolution of the literature dealing with interdependence in the international System is looked into. An attempt is made to show its significance and main points as well as its implications. The debates on interdependence within the North-American political context are regarded as solutions to the preceding issues on dependence. Interesting passages are dedicated to the impact of the interdependence theory on the interpretation of the international system, as illustrated by two schools of thought in foreign policy (Kissinger-Brzezinski). Linkage of the tactical and strategic aspects to the economic and political interrelation of international relations, as put forward by policy makers, has brought to the fore the difficulties and limits of negotiation in the face of competition and in the aftermath of confrontation. This paper offers subtle, yet positive, conclusions on the use of the interdependance theory in international policy.

scholarly journals Politics, policy-making and the presence of images of suffering children

2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 593-608
Author(s):  
Helen Berents
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Visual Politics ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
Political Dimensions

Abstract In 2017 Trump expressed pity for the ‘beautiful babies’ killed in a gas attack on Khan Shaykhun in Syria before launching airstrikes against President Assad's regime. Images of suffering children in world politics are often used as a synecdoche for a broader conflict or disaster. Injured, suffering, or dead; the ways in which images of children circulate in global public discourse must be critically examined to uncover the assumptions that operate in these environments. This article explores reactions to images of children by representatives and leaders of states to trace the interconnected affective and political dimensions of these images. In contrast to attending to the expected empathetic responses prompted by images of children, this article particularly focuses on when such images prompt bellicose foreign policy decision-making. In doing this, the article forwards a way of thinking about images as contentious affective objects in international relations. The ways in which images of children's bodies and suffering are strategically deployed by politicians deserves closer scrutiny to uncover the visual politics of childhood inherent in these moments of international politics and policy-making.

International Relations Theory

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Cristol
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
The Other ◽  
Ir Theory ◽  
State Behavior ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Starting Point

International relations (IR) theory is difficult to define. It is often taught as a theory that seeks both to explain past state behavior and to predict future state behavior. However, even that definition is contested by many theorists. Traditional IR theories can generally be categorized by their focus either on humans, states, or on the state system as the primary source of conflict. Any bibliography of international relations theory is bound to create controversy among its readers. Why did the author choose one theory and not the other? Why did the author choose one source and not the other? Indeed, a wide variety of permutations would be perfectly valid to provide the researcher with an adequate annotated bibliography, so why were these particular entries chosen? This article identifies Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism as the three major branches of IR theory. These three branches have replaced the earlier realism-idealism dichotomy. The “English School” could be considered part of any of the aforementioned three branches, and its placement in the IR theory world is the subject of some debate. It has therefore been given its own section and is not included in any of the other sections. Critical IR theory and Feminist IR theory are often considered part of constructivism; however, there is much debate over whether they constitute their own branches, and so they are included in this article (as well as in their own entries in the OBO series), though the sources are somewhat different. Post–Cold War IR Theory is given its own heading because there are a number of theories that were proposed in the immediate aftermath of the Cold War that are still widely taught and discussed in the field. Perhaps the most controversial inclusion is that of Neoconservatism. Though it is quite possible to mount a case for it to be considered a theory of US foreign policy, it is theoretically distinct from other IR theories (the belief in bandwagoning instead of balancing). The final three sections are included to show how political theory has influenced IR theory, and how history and foreign policy have influenced IR theory (and vice versa). The included sections and citations represent both the mainstream of IR theory and those nonmainstream theories that have just started to break into the mainstream of IR theory. This article provides a starting point for both the beginning and the serious scholar of international relations theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document