Dr Hugh Dyer
Tutor information is taken from the Module Catalogue
- General Reading
- Online resources
- Week One – Introduction
- Week Two – Sovereignty and Anarchy
- Week Three - Realism
- Week Four - Liberalism
- Week Five - Globalisation
- Week Six – Post-Positivism: Critical International Theory
- Week Seven – Reading Gender into IR
- Week Eight – Green Politics
- Week Nine - New Wars (and Terrorism)
- Week Ten - Pooling Sovereignty
Burchill, Devetak, Linklater, Paterson, Reus-Smith and True, Theories of International Relations (available online)
Brown and Eckersley, The Oxford handbook of international political theory (available online)
Dunne, Kurki and Smith, International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity (available online)
ISBN: 9780191809231 (ebook) : No price
Lebow and Risse-Kappen, International relations theory and the end of the Cold War,
Booth and Smith, International relations theory today,
Smith, Booth and Zalewski, International Theory: positivism and beyond,
Little and Smith, Perspectives on World Politics,
Baylis and Smith, The Globalization of World Politics,
Weber, Cynthia, International relations theory : a critical introduction
Hough, Peter: Understanding global security
Barma, Naazneen and Vogel, Steven: The political economy reader : markets as institutions
Online Resources – International Relations Theory - A collection of multimedia resources and links introducing the major theoretical approaches within International Relations - https://www.e-ir.info/online-resources-international-relations-theory/
Conversations with History - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/conversations/ (some of which are linked in the topic reading lists below)
Oxford University Press - International Relations Resource Centre - https://global.oup.com/uk/orc/politics/intro/internationalrelations/
YouTube, and other platforms give access to various other UK resources, and also has public lectures from US universities such as Stanford, Yale and Princeton available on relevant issues - search for 'International Relations' or 'International Relations Theory'.
Many sources (both books in some cases, and most journal articles) are available online via the Library (and searchable as such), and links below include these as well as print only sources for reference - note that even print only sources (books) may have reviews of the work listed so that the content and arguments can be appreciated.
Google Scholar provides a simple way to broadly search for scholarly literature (https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/help.html).
Oxford Bibliographies - International Relations Theory gives an overview of introductory textbooks ( https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199743292/obo-9780199743292-0039.xml )
Week One – Introduction
- expectations, methods, writing, plagiarism, electronic tools, etc
Week Two – Sovereignty and Anarchy
Seminar Questions: What is the relationship between sovereignty and anarchy in the westphalian system? Is the international system really an anarchical society?
‘Sovereignty’, Interview with Stephen Krasner - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people3/Krasner/krasner-con0.html
D. Zaum – The sovereignty paradox : the norms and politics of international statebuilding 2007. (available online)
S. Krasner – Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (1999) (available online)
C. Covell, Hobbes, realism and the tradition of international law, (2004),
Malcolm Noel, Aspects of Hobbes, electronic resource (2002),
Toby Dodge, Inventing Iraq : the failure of nation building and a history denied (2003),
James Sidaway, Imagined regional communities : integration and sovereignty in the global south (2002),
‘ Responsibility to Protect’. International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (2001) https://www.idrc.ca/en/book/responsibility-protect-report-international-commission-intervention-and-state-sovereignty
‘ The Responsibility to Protect: An Idea Whose time has come…and gone? , Gareth Evans http://www.aber.ac.uk/interpol/en/research/DDMI/DavidDavies.htm
Saskia Sassen, Losing Control? : sovereignty in an age of globalization (1996),
Joseph A. Camillieri, The end of sovereignty? : the politics of a shrinking and fragmenting world (1992),
Hendrik Spruyt, The sovereign state and its competitors : an analysis of systems change (1994),
F.H. Hinsley, Sovereignty (1966),
Andrew Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community : ethical foundations of the Post-Westphalian era (1998),
Charles Tilley, The Formation of National States in Western Europe (1975),
Richard Falk, ‘Revisiting Westphalia, Discovering Post-Westphalia’, The Journal of Ethics., Vol. 6, 2002
Garett Mattingly, Renaissance Diplomacy, (1955),
Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities (1995),
Crawford, The International Law Commission's articles on state responsibility : introduction, text, and commentaries 2002), available online here
Weiss, ‘The Sunset of Humanitarianism: The Responsibility to Protect in a Unipolar Era’, Security Dialogue, 35(2),
Review of international studies., 30 (2) Articles on Wendt’s proposition ‘Is the State a Person’,
Marco Sassoli, ‘ State Responsibility for violations of international humanitarian law ’ International review of the Red Cross, vol. 846,
Etzioni, ‘Genocide Prevention in the New Global Architecture’, British Journal of Politics & International Relations., 7(4),
Werner and Wilde, ‘The Endurance of Sovereignty’, European Journal of International Relations., 7(3),
Cutler, ‘Critical Reflections on the Westphalian assumptions of International law and Organization’, Review of International Studies., 27 (2),
Andreas, ‘Redrawing the Line: Borders and Security in the 21st C’ International Security., 28(2),
Richmond, ‘States of Sovereignty, sovereign states and ethnic claims for international status’, Review of International Studies., 28(2),
Warren, ‘The Rise of the State System in Africa’, Review of International Studies, 27(5),
Williams and Bellamy, ‘The Responsibility to Protect and the Crisis in Darfur’, Security Dialogue, 36(1),
Teschke, ‘Theorizing the Westphalian System of States’, European journal of international relations., 8(1),
Andreas, ‘Borders and Security in the 21st Century’, International Security., 28(2).
Booth and Wheeler, The Security Dilemma : fear, cooperation, and trust in world politics, (2008)
Mullerson, Ordering Anarchy: international law in international society (2001),
Brown (ed), The Perils of Anarchy: contemporary realism and international security: (1995),
A. Wendt, ‘ Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics ’, in International Organization 1992, Vol.46 (2), p.391-425).
Buzan, The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism: (1993).
Herbert Read, Anarchy and Order (1974).
Bull, The Anarchical Society (1977),
Williams and Little, The Anarchical Society in a Globalized World (2006).
Guzzini and Leander (eds), Constructivism and International Relations : Alexander Wendt and his Critics, (2006).
D. Lake, ‘Escape from the State of Nature: Authority and Hierarchy in World Politics’, International Security., 2007, Vol. 32, No. 1.
In the above section you should investigate the meaning of sovereignty and anarchy and their supposed relationships. Also what is meant by the phrase ‘the Westphalian order’? Tilley and Mattingly offer historical perspectives on the formation of the early modern state and the Westphalian system but Knutsen does also, as do most of the general commentaries. Most articles address the question of the challenge to Westphalia. Is Westphalia a poor basis for stability and progress? In fact, this is a basic theme of International Relations. Thus reading on globalization, international law, the new wars, international organization, humanitarian intervention, and green politics is also relevant to this section. Sovereignty and anarchy are foundational concepts in IR.
Week Three - Realism
Seminar Questions: Is realism a theory of the national interest? What is meant by this phrase?
N. Machiavelli, The Prince,1532 (a number of editions are available)
E.H. Carr, The Twenty Years’ Crisis (London: Macmillan, 1939),
Hans J. Morgenthau and Kenneth W. Thompson (eds.), Principles & problems of international politics : selected readings (New York, Knopf, 1952),
Hans J. Morgenthau, ‘“Another Great Debate”: The National Interest of the United States, The American political science review., 46, 4 (1952),
Hans J. Morgenthau, In defense of the national interest : a critical examination of American foreign policy (New York: Knopf, 1951),
Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations (New York: Knopf, 1948; 5th Ed. revised, 1978),
Hans J. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs Power Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946),
Hans J. Morgenthau, Vietnam and the United States (Washington, DC: Public Affairs Press, 1972),
Martin Wight, Power Politics, 2nd Ed., edited by Hedley Bull and Carsten Holbraad (Leicester: Leicester University Press for the Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1978),
F.H. Hinsley, Power and the pursuit of peace : theory and practice in the history of relations between states. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963),
Torbjörn L. Knutsen, A History of International Relations Theory (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992), chap. 8,
Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, (2001).
William C. Wohlforth, Richard Little, Stuart J. Kaufman, David Kang, Charles A. Jones, Victoria Tin-Bor Hui, Arthur Eckstein, Daniel Deudney, and William L. Brenner, ‘Testing Balance-of-Power Theory in World History’ European journal of international relations. 2007 13.
‘Theory and International Politics’ – Interview with Kenneth Waltz - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people3/Waltz/waltz-con0.html
‘ Through the Realist Lens’ – Interview with John Mearsheimer - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people2/Mearsheimer/mearsheimer-con0.html
R.O. Keohane (ed.), Neorealism and its Critics (New York: Columbia, 1986),
Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics (Boston and London: Addison Wesley, 1979),
Kenneth N. Waltz, Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1954),
Kenneth N. Waltz, ‘The New World Order’, Millennium., 22, 2 (Summer 1993),
Interview with Waltz, Review of International Studies., vol 24, no 2, 1998,
Waltz, 'The continuity of international politics' in Worlds in collision: terror and the future of global order (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2002)
Waltz, ‘Structural Realism After the Cold War’, International Security., 25(1),
Mearsheimer, 'Back to the future : Instability in Europe after the Cold War', International Security, 15(1).
‘American Foreign Policy in a New Era’, Interview with Robert Jervis - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people5/Jervis/jervis-con0.html
‘ US Foreign Policy and the AmericanPolitical Tradition’, Interview with Walter Russell Mead - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people3/Mead/mead-con0.html
Michael W. Doyle, ‘Thucydidean Realism’, Review of International Studies. 16, 3 (July 1990),
John Farrenkopf, ‘The Challenge of Spenglerian Pessimism to Ranke and Political Realism’, Review of International Studies., 17, 3 (July 1991),
P. Gellman, ‘Hans J. Morgenthau and the Legacy of Political Realism’, Review of International Studies., 14, 4 (1988),
A. James, ‘On the Realism of Realism’, Review of International Studies., 15, 3 (1989),
J.W. Nobel, ‘Morgenthau’s Theory and Practice: A Response to Peter Gellman’, Review of International Studies., 15, 3 (1989),
Justin Rosenberg, ‘What’s the Matter with Realism? ’, Review of International Studies., 16, 4 (October 1990),
Stefano Guzzini, ‘Structural Power: The Limits of Neorealist Power Analysis’, International Organization., 47, 3 (Summer 1993),
Alexander Wendt, ‘Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics’, International Organization, 46, 2 (Spring 1992),
David Welch, ‘Why International Relations Theorists Should Stop Reading Thucydides’, Review of international studies., vol 29, no 3, 2003,
Nancy Kozac, ‘Moderating Power: a Thucydidean Perspective’, Review of international studies., vol 27, no 1, 2001,
Michael Nicholson, ‘Realism and Utopianism revisited’, Review of international studies., vol 24, no 5, 1998,
Stephen Krasner, ‘Rethinking the Sovereign State Model’, Review of international studies., vol 27, no 5, 2001,
D. Paul, ‘Sovereignty, Survival and the Westphalian Blind Alley’, Review of international studies., vol 25, no 2, 1999,
Susan Strange, ‘The Westfailure System’, Review of international studies., vol 25, no 3, 1999,
Jervis, ‘Realism, Neo-liberalism and Cooperation’, International security., Vol 24, No 1,
Legro and Moravscik, ‘Is Anybody still a realist? ’, International security, Vol 24, No 2,
Waltz, ‘Structural Realism After the Cold War’, International security, Vol 25, No 1,
Mearsheimer, ‘Back to the Future: Instability in Europe After the Cold War’, International security, Vol 15,
Mearscheimer, ‘The False Promise of International Institutions’, International security, Vol 19,
Glaser, ‘Structural Realism in a More Complex World’, Review of international studies., 29(3),
Snyder, ‘Mearsheimer’s World: Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security’, International security, 27(1),
Lake, ‘Beyond Anarchy: the importance of Security Institutions After the Cold War’, International security, 26(1),
Taliaferro, ‘Security Seeking Under Anarchy: Defensive Realism Revisited’, International security, 25(3),
MccGuire, ‘The Paradigm that Lost its Way’, International affairs., 77(4),
Andreas, ‘Borders and Security in the 21st Century’, International security 28(2).
E. Montgomery, ‘The Unipolar Moment’, International security, Vol. 31, No. 2.
In this section you should initially aim to understand the outlines of classical realism and its differences with neo-realism. Morgenthau is classical realist as is Machiavelli, whereas Waltz and Mearsheimer, particularly Waltz, are neo-realists. Neo-realism has been the subject of a vigorous academic debate in Europe and the United States for a number of years. Neo-realists put forward what is often called a positivist version of social science (see reading on postmodernism below) but is also rigorous in its detail. What are the main challenges to the neorealist argument about structure and agency? Does neo-realism have an accurate picture of the international system? What is the neo-realist analysis of international institutions and is it a helpful one? More broadly, are realists correct in their analysis of the fundamentals of IR and is it a rational response to a sovereign, anarchical system?
Week Four - Liberalism
Seminar Questions: Can the international system be made to progress or evolve? What is meant by progression and evolution according to liberalism?
John Locke, Two Treatises of Government (the first 5 chapters of the 2nd treatises are the foundations of nearly all liberal thought in IR theory),
Patterson, Early Modern Liberalism,
H. Laski The Rise of European Liberalism,
T. Knutsen, A History of International Relations Theory,
Michael Doyle, ‘Kant, Liberal Legacies and Foreign Affairs’, Philosophy & public affairs. (Vol. 12, No.3, 1983),
Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (1992),
Franceschet, ‘Sovereignty and Freedom: Immanuel Kant’s liberal internationalist ‘legacy’, Review of international studies., 27(2),
Deudney, ‘The Nature and Sources of Liberal International Order’, Review of international studies., 25(1),
A. Patterson, Early modern liberalism, (1997),
Dunn, Locke : a very short introduction, (2003).
Realism and Idealism in the 1930s
Zimmern, A.E., The League of Nations and the Rule of Law 1918-1935, is the classic ‘idealist’ text, written in the 1930s. Zimmern proposes the peace through law thesis.
Idealism is discussed in Knutsen – A history of international relations theory and Griffith, Realism, idealism and international politics : a reinterpretation (1992).
Authors also challenge the realist interpretation of the 1930s: Lucien Ashworth. ‘Did the Realist-Idealist Debate Really Happen’, International relations., Vol. 16, no.1,
Paul Rich, ‘Reinventing Peace: David Davies, Alfred Zimmern and Liberal Internationalism in Interwar Britain’, International relations., No. 16, no. 1,
Vignesawran, ‘The Construction of an Edifice: the story of the first great debate’, Review of international studies., 31(1),
Theis, ‘Progress, History and Identity in IR Theory: The Case of the Realist-Idealist Debate’, European journal of international relations., 8(2),
Pemberton, ‘The League of Nations in an Age of Electricity’, Review of international studies., 28(2),
Numerous articles on ‘The World Crisis and the Origins of International Relations’.
Liberalism and US Foreign Policy
‘Militarism and the American Empire’, Interview with Chalmers Johnson - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people4/CJohnson/cjohnson-con0.html
Liberalism is one influence on US Foreign Policy and through this international relations.
Arthur S. Link, The higher realism of Woodrow Wilson, and other essays (1971),
Harley Nathan, The origins of the foreign policy of Woodrow Wilson., (1965),
Woodrow Wilson, The papers of Woodrow Wilson,
Thomas J. Knock, To End all Wars: Woodrow Wilson and the Quest for a New World Order (1992),
Norman Levin, Woodrow Wilson and World Politics: America’s Response to War and Revolution (1970),
John Ikenberry, 'Liberal hegemony and the future of American postwar order', in International order and the future of world politics ed. T.V. Paul and John Hall (1999)
Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and interdependence: World Politics in Transition (Little, Brown, 1977),
Keohane, After Hegemony
Allen Lynch, ‘Woodrow Wilson and the principle of ‘national self-determination’: a reconsideration’, Review of international studies., 28(2),
Ikenberry, ‘Constitutional Politics in International Relations’, European journal of international relations., 4(2).
Robert Keohane, Neorealism and its critics,
J.G. Ruggie, 'International regimes, transactions and change : embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order', International organization 36(2) 1982, pp. 379-415
Hasenclever, Mayer and Rittberger ‘Integrating Theories of International Regimes’, Review of international studies., Vol. 26, No. 1. A neat summary of the arguments between realist hegemonic stability theory and liberal institutionalist approaches. Also contains a massive bibliography for further reading and is available electronically,
Baylis and Smith The Globalization of World Politics, chapters on liberalism and international Regimes are good.
S. Krasner, International regimes (1983),
Jervis, ‘Realism, Neo-liberalism and Cooperation’, International security., Vol 24, No 1.
Keohane, ‘Cooperation and International Regimes’ in Little and Smith (eds), Perspectives on World Politics, (1991),
‘ Liberal Hegemony and the future of American Post-war Order’ in Paul and Hall (eds), International Order and the Future of World Politics (1999)
In this section it is necessary to gain some understanding of the themes embedded in classical liberalism – primarily freedom and historical progress. How does liberalism differ from realism? In the early part of the 20th Century liberalism in IR was known as ‘idealism’, which became a pejorative term in international relations, particularly because of the experience of the League of Nations. Idealism was heavily criticized during the interwar years by the classical realist Carr but Carr’s criticism and the realist analysis of idealism has recently been attacked for being too simplistic. In contemporary IR, liberalism is often called neo-liberalism (in opposition to neo-realism). What are the differences and similarities between neo-realism and neo-liberalism? You should also note the liberal ideas of Ikenberry who argues that the United States can play a positive role in the international order as it projects a liberal foreign policy and a liberal order but one backed up by hegemonic power. Does this notion make any sense in traditional liberal terms?
Week Five - Globalisation
Seminar Questions: If you were offering what Machiavelli called ‘advice to princes’, would advise embracing globalisation or would you attempt to fight it?
‘Global Competition and the Rise of the Second World’ – Interview with Parag Khanna, http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people8/Khanna/khanna-con0.html
‘ International Relations in the Information Age’, John Arquilla - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people3/Arquilla/arquilla-con0.html
‘ Globalization and Islam’ – Interview with Olivier Roy - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people7/Roy/roy07-con0.html
Saskia Sassen, Losing control? : sovereignty in an age of globalization (1996),
Joseph A. Camilleri, The end of sovereignty? : the politics of a shrinking and fragmenting world (1992),
P. Steeten, Globalisation : threat or opportunity?,
P. Hamel (eds) Globalization and social movements,
J.A. Scholte, Globalization, A Critical Introduction,
Ian Clark, Globalization and international relations theory,
R.J.Holston, Globalization and the Nation State,
F.H. Lechner, The Globalization Reader,
D. Held, Global Transformations,
Nassar, Globalization and terrorism : the migration of dreams and nightmares, (2005),
Sassen, Globalization and its discontents (1998),
Meana, Globalization and the challenges of a new century : a reader (2000),
Weiss, 'Globalization and the myth of the powerless state' in The New Left Review I/225 (1997)
Holton Globalization and the Nation State (1998),
S. Horowitz, ‘Reversing globalization: Trade Policy Consequences of WW1’, European journal of international relations. s, March 2004,
L.M.S. Presas, ‘De-globalization or further globalization’, British journal of politics & international relations., vol. 5, no 3,
J. Grugel, ‘Democratisation studies globalisation: the coming of age of a paradigm’, British journal of politics & international relations., vol. 5, no. 2,
David Held, ‘Cosmopolitanism: Globalisation Tamed’, Review of international studies., October 2003,
Jamus Jerome Lim, ‘The Role of the State in an Increasingly Borderless World’
Justin Rosenberg, The follies of globalisation theory : polemical essays (Verso, 2002),
James Petras, Globalization unmasked : imperialism in the 21st century (ZED 2001),
P. Hirst and G. Thompson, Globalization in Question,
Cronin, ‘Globalisation and International Terrorism’, International security., Vol 27, No 3,
Mousseau, ‘Market Civilisation and its Clash with Terror’, International security., vol 27, No 3,
Ripsmann, ‘Under Pressure: Globalization and the National Security State’, Millennium., 33(2),
Harris, ‘The US Military in the Era of Globalization’, Race and class., 44(2),
Kay, ‘Globalization, Power and Security’, Security Dialogue, 35(1),
Mann, ‘Has Globalization ended the Rise of the Nation-State’ in Paul and Hall (eds.) op. cit..
Eschete and Maiguascha, Critical theories, international relations, and "the anti-globalisation movement" : the politics of global resistance (2005),
Held and McGrew, Globalization theory : approaches and controversies, (2007),
Donatello della Porta, Globalization from below : transnational activists and protest networks (2006),
Krieger. Globalization and state power : a reader, (2006),
Globalisation is a term now associated with International Relations Theory but its origins are in sociology and economics. What challenges does globalisation create for the state and the state system? Can the term even be defined properly? Held defines globalisation in terms of global ‘flows’ across national borders and it is useful to consider that globalisation creates forces that make it difficult for states to control borders, such as in the case of information flows, population flows and migration. The ability to control borders is one of the central pillars of sovereignty (along with a monopoly of military power). So, are globalisation and sovereignty in opposition and how is globalisation to be used as a term of empirical analysis? It seems to refer to ‘everything that resists the control of the state and which transcends national boundaries and is in some sense in opposition to the state’. But what does this category include? Globalisation, so some argue, benefits states in economic terms but in terms of security there are problems.
Week Six – Post-Positivism: Critical International Theory
Seminar Questions: Does a classical theory, such as realism, need to be deconstructed and, if so, then why? What are the uses of critical theory?
Jurgen Habermas Interview - http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=jBl6ALNh18Q&feature=related
‘ Philosophical Iterations, Cosmopolitanism and the “Right to Rights” ’, Interview with Seyla Benhabib - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people4/Benhabib/benhabib-con0.html
Justice vs Power – Chomsky and Foucault (1971) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpVQ3l5P0A4
Cox, ‘Social Forces, states and world orders: beyond international relations theory’, in Little and Smith Perspectives on World Politics (eds),
Hopkins, World-systems analysis : theory and methodology (1982),
Keohane (eds.) Neorealism and its critics, Chapter 1 (1986)
Cox, Production, power and world order, (1987) ,
Andrew Linklater, Men and citizens in the theory of international relations; Beyond realism and Marxism : critical theory and international relations; The transformation of political community : ethical foundations of the Post-Westphalian era
Beads, ‘The Future of Critical Philosophy and World Politics’, Millennium., August 2005,
Habermas, 'Modernity versus postmodernity' in New German critique 22 (1981).
Habermas, Time of transitions (2005) ,
Derrida, On cosmopolitanism and forgiveness (2001),
Devetak, ‘The Gothic Scene of International Relations’, Review of international studies., 31(4),
Devetak, Critical International Theory: An Intellectual History (Oxford University Press, 2018),
Weber, International relations theory : a critical introduction (2005),
Wyn Jones, Critical theory and world politics (2001),
Der Derian, International Theory: Critical Investigations, (1995),
Walker, Inside/outside : international relations as political theory (1993),
Smith, Booth and Zalewski, International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (1996),
Scott, Burchill and Linklater, Theories of International Relations (chapters on critical theory and postmodernism),
Wendt, Social theory of international politics (1999);
‘Anarchy is what States Make of It’, International organization., 46 (2) (also in Der Derian),
Macmillan and Linklater, Boundaries in question : new directions in international relations (1995),
Wendt, ‘Why a World State is Inevitable’ European journal of international relations., 9(4),
Shannon, ‘Wendt’s Violation of the Constructivist Project’, European journal of international relations., 11(4),
Epistemology means the theory of knowledge, or how do we know what we claim to know? IR is a discipline that aims to create knowledge about the world so IR is subject to epistemological scrutiny. What has been said about the epistemological basis of IR? In this section consider the distinction between critical theory, postmodernism and constructivism. Habermas is a critical theorist, Foucault and Derrida are postmodernists and Wendt a constructivist. All three approaches argue something different. Postmodernists claim that most theories are sorts of fictions but dangerous fictions that somehow influence the real world. Critical theorists seek to link knowledge and emancipation and are suspicious of the focus on the part of postmodernism on culture and narrative and are critical of the positivist versions of IR theory such as neo-realism. Constructivists are more in the mainstream and talk about the importance of identity in the construction of states. All three approaches are united by a concern to undo foundational or positivist thinking, hence the term post-positivism.
Week Seven – Reading Gender into IR
Seminar questions: How does gender operate in international relations?
Jones, Adam, ‘Does ‘Gender’ Make the World Go Round? Feminist Critiques of International Relations’, Review of international studies., vol.22, no.? , 1996
Tickner, J. Ann, ‘You Just Don’t Understand: Troubled Engagements Between Feminists and IR Theorists’, International studies quarterly., vol.41, no.4, 1997.
Sylvester, Christine Feminist international relations : an unfinished journey (Cambridge: CUP, 2002) ,
Peterson, V. Spike and Runyan, Anne Sisson (1999), Global gender issues, 2nd edn, Boulder CO: Westview
Tickner, J. Ann (2001), Gendering world politics : issues and approaches in the post-Cold War era, New York, Columbia University Press
Enloe, Cynthia (2000), Maneuvers : the international politics of militarizing women's lives, Berkeley, University of California Press
Dunne, Kurki, Smith (2007) (eds.): International relations theories : discipline and diversity, Oxford, OUP
Smith, Booth, Zalewski (1996) International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, CUP
Weber, Cynthia (2005), International relations theory : a critical introduction, 2nd edn., Routledge
Margot Light and Fred Halliday: ‘Gender and International Relations’, in Groom and Light (eds). Contemporary international relations : a guide to theory, 1994, Pinter Publishers
Jill Steans, Gender and international relations : issues, debates and future directions (Oxford: Polity Press, 1998),
Robinson, Fiona (1999), Globalizing care : ethics, feminist theory, and international relations, Oxford, Westview Press
Benhabib, Seyla and Cornell, Drucilla (eds.): Feminism as Critique, (Polity Press, 1987)
‘Feminism and Postmodernism’, Linda Nicholson and Nancy Fraser, in Ross, Andrew, (1988) Universal Abandon: The Politics of Postmodernism
Marchand, Mariane and Runyon, Anne Sisson (eds) (2000), Gender and global restructuring : sightings, sites and resistances, Routledge
Burchill et al, Theories of International Relations (2nd edn)
Rebecca Grant & Kathleen Newland (eds.), Gender and international relations (Milton Keynes: OUP, 1991),
Sandra Whitworth, Feminism and international relations : towards a political economy of gender in interstate and non-governmental institutions (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 19940,
Gillian Youngs, ‘Feminist International Relations: A Contradiction in Terms? Or: Why Women and Gender are Essential to Understanding the World We Live In’, International affairs. vol.80, no.1, 2004.
Robert O. Keohane, ‘Beyond Dichotomy: Conversations Between International Relations and Feminist Theory’, International studies quarterly., vol.42, no.1, 1998.
Craig N. Murphy, ‘Seeing Women, Recognizing Gender, Recasting International Relations’, International organization., vol.50, no.3, 1996.
Cynthia Weber, ‘IR: The Resurrection of New Frontiers of Incorporation’, European journal of international relations., vol.5, no.4, 1999.
Marysia Zalweski & Jane Papart (eds.), The "man" question in international relations (Boulder: Westview Press, 1998
Ken Booth (ed.), Critical security studies and world politics (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2005)
Men and masculinities. Vol. 10, No. 4, 2008
Building on the possibilities presented by critical thinking and post-positivism, alternative perspectives on 'the international' such as gender analysis can shed light on what is accepted as common sense foundations in ontology and epistemology and methodology. Specifically, gender casts international politics in terms of a a specific set of identities which underwrite different forms and dynamics of relationships, including structural power and domination. The key distinction between sex and gender is that the former seems empirically biologically determined, while the latter is socially constructed. A focus on gender allows us to query the political importance of agents and structures, such as 'women' and patriarchy, and assigned characteristics of femininity and masculinity which limit and delimit discourses and practices in international relations, with profound implications for international relations theory.
Week Eight – Green Politics
Seminar questions: Do you have confidence in the capacity of the state system to deal with and resolve the global environmental crisis?
Environment: Politics, Policy and the Global Agenda – Interviews with… http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/conversations/PubEd/research/environment.html
Andrew Dobson, ‘Ecological Citizenship: A Defence’ Environmental politics., Vol 15, No. 3, June, 2006, pp.447-451.
Simon Dalby, ‘The Nuclear Syndrome: Victory for the Irish Anti-Nuclear Power Movement’, first published in Dawn Train, vol, 3, Winter 1984/5 @ http://www.laka.org/protest/geschiedenis/Ireland.pdf.
Andrew Dobson and Derek Bell, Environmental citizenship, (London: MIT Press, 2006).
Andrew Dobson, Citizenship and the Environment, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, Oxford Scholarship on-line),
Ian Welsh, ‘In Defence of Civilization: Terrorism and Environmental Politics in the 21st Century’, Environmental politics., Vol. 16, No. 2.
Andrew Dobson, ‘Ecological Citizenship: A Defence’, Environmental politics., Vol. 15, No. 3, p. 447-451, June 2006.
Andrew Dobson and Robyn Eckersley, Political theory and the ecological challenge, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006).
John Dryzek, The Politics of the Earth, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) 2nd edition.
Robyn Eckersley, The green state : rethinking democracy and sovereignty, (Cambridge, Mass.; MIT Press, 2004).
Spencer Weart – The Discovery of Global Warming (2003),
J. Houghton, Global Warming: the Complete Briefing (2004),
David Victor, The Collapse of the Kyoto Protocol, (2001),
M. Paterson, Global warming and global politics, (1995).
A. Pittock, Climate change : turning up the heat, (2005).
P. Latta, ‘Locating Democratic Politics in Ecological Citizenship’, Environmental politics., Vol. 16, No 3,
Mick Smith, ‘Wildlife: Anarchy: Ecology and Ethics’, Environmental politics., Vol. 16., No. 3,
Susan Baker, ‘Dependent Industrialisation and Political Protest’, Government and opposition., vol. 22, No. 3, 1987, pp. 352-358,
Susan Baker, ‘The Politics of Cross-Border Environmental Pollution: The Case of the Sellafield Nuclear Facility; Administration., vol. 39, no 2, 2001, pp. 90-115.
Susan Baker, ‘The Evolution of the Irish Ecology Movement’ in Wolfgang Rudig Green Politics One, editor, (Edinburgh University Press, 1990),
Susan Baker, ‘The Nuclear Power Issue in Ireland: The Role of the Irish Anti-Nuclear Movement’, Irish political studies., vol. 17, No. 1, 2000, pp. 3-18.
Ulrich Beck, Risk society : towards a new modernity, (New Delhi, Sage, 1992).
Roland Bleiker, ‘Activism after Seattle: Dilemmas of the Anti-Globalisation Movement’, Pacifica review., Vol 14, No 3, October 2002, pp.191-207.
Mark Garavan, ‘Democracy in an Ecological Age’, FEASTA Review no. 2 October 2004 on http://www.feasta.org/
James Hart and Ulrich Melle, ‘On Rudolph Bahro’ in Democracy and Nature, Vol 4 @ https://www.democracynature.org/vol4/hart_melle_bahro.htm
Tim Hayward, ‘Ecological Citizenship: Justice, Rights and the Virtue of Resourcefulness’, Environmental politics., Vol. 15, No. 3, 2006, 425-446.
Tim Hayward, Ecological thought : an introduction (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994).
David Martin Jones, ed., Globalisation and the new terror : the Asia Pacific dimension (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2004).
Robert Jay Lifton’s, Destroying the world to save it : Aum Shinrikyō, apocalyptic violence, and the the new global terrorism (New York, Henry Holt and Co, 2000) .
Rik Scarce, Eco-warriors : understanding the radical environmental movement, (Walnut Creek, West Coast Press Inc., 1990).
Verta Taylor, ‘Mobilizing for Change in a Social Movement Society’, Contemporary sociology., vol. 29, No. 1, 2000, pp. 219-230.
Hilary Tovey, ‘Environmentalism in Ireland: Two Versions of Development and Modernity’, International sociology, 1993, Vol 8 No.4 pp. 413-430.
Jeremy Wates, ‘The Role of the Aarhus Convention in Environmental Risk Communication’, Roundtable Discussion on WTO Law, Science and Risk Communication, University of Geneva May 2006). Available online
Tatiana R. Zacharchenko and Gretta Goldenman, ‘Accountability in Governance: the Challenge of Implementing the Aarhus Convention in Eastern Europe and Central Asia’, International environmental agreements : politics, law and economics., 4 229-251 2004).
John Zerzan edited, Against civilization : readings and reflections (Feral House Publishing) .
The EarthFirst movement @ http://www.earthfirst.org
Shell to Sea @ http://www.shelltosea.com
Special Publications Series Two, ‘International Principles for Social Impact Assessment’ http://www.iaia.org
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe www.unece.org
International Association for Impact Assessment http://www.iaia.org/
The European Union’s web page on Aarhus @ http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/index.htm. Zerzan – Elements of Refusal and Future Primitive.
In this section we consider two responses to environmental crisis – the ecological and the environmental. There is a debate within green political theory about the appropriate response to environmental crisis. Ecological theorists prefer radical critiques of the international system (e.g. Dobson) while environmental theorists (Hayward) are more confident about the capacities of the existing political system. Ideas of deep ecology overlap with anti-globalization forms of activism.
Week Nine - New Wars (and Terrorism)
Seminar Questions: Are states adapting well to fighting so-called new wars?
‘Terror and Consent: The Wars for the 21st Century’, Interview with Philip Bobbitt - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people8/Bobbitt/bobbitt-con0.html
‘ Identity and Change in the Network Society’, Interview with Manuel Castells - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people/Castells/castells-con0.html
Munckler, The new wars (2005),
Gilbert, New terror, new wars (2003),
Alheide, Terrorism and the politics of fear, (2006),
Paul Rogers, Losing Control, chapters 5 and 6,
Mary Kaldor, New and Old Wars chapters 3 and four,
R. Gunaratna, Inside Al Qaeda: Global Network of Terror,
William Shawcross, Deliver us from Evil,
UN High Level Panal Report – A More Secure World (available on the web),
US Naval War College, ‘ Computer network attack and international law ’ (2002),
Roberts, Hype or reality : the "new terrorism" and mass casualty attacks (2000),
Tuchman, ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction and the United Nations’, Global governance : a review of multilateralism and international organizations., 10(3),
Bendal, ‘How New are the New Wars’, Global governance : a review of multilateralism and international organizations., 9(4), Security Dialogue, September 2005, numerous articles analyzing the UN’s High-Level Panel on Reform,
Weiss, ‘The Sunset of Humanitarian Intervention: The Responsibility to Protect in a Unipolar Era’, Security Dialogue, 25(2),
Dhanapala, ‘The UN’s Response to 9/11’, Terrorism and political violence. Winter 2005,
Mendelson, ‘Sovereignty Under Attack: the International Society Meets the Al Qaeda Network’, Review of international studies., 31(1),
Munkler, ‘The Wars of the 21st Century’, International review of the Red Cross, vol. 849, also see Herrmann in the same volume.
Schmitt, ‘Wired Warfare: Computer Network Attack and jus in bello’, International review of the Red Cross, vol. 846,
McInnes, ‘A Different Kind of War’, Review of international studies., 29(2),
Rogers, ‘Losing Control: War and the Modern World’, International relations. 17(1),
Byers, ‘Terrorism, the Use of Force and International Law After 9/11’, International relations., 16(2),
Hirst, ‘Another Century of Conflict: War and the International System in the 21st Century’, International relations., 16(3),
Holsti, ‘The coming chaos: armed conflict on the world’s periphery’ in Hall and Paul (eds.) International Order and the Future of World Politics, ‘Great Equalizers or agents of chaos? Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Emerging International Order’ in Hall and Paul (eds.) International Order and the Future of World Politics
Gilbert, New terror, new wars (2003),
Burke, Al Qaeda: The True Story of Radical Islam (2004),
Gunaratna, Inside Al Qaeda,
Gandomenico, ‘The Challenges of Strategic Terrorism’, Terrorism and political violence., 17(1-2),
Ulrich Beck, ‘War is Peace: on post-national war’, Security Dialogue, 36(3),
Newman, ‘The New Wars Debate: A Historical Perspective is Needed’, Security Dialogue, 35(2),
Lacina, ‘From Side Show to Centre Stage: Civil Conflict After the Cold War’, Security Dialogue, 25(2),
K. Marten, ‘Warlordism in Contemporary Conflict’, International security., Vol. 31, No. 3,
Claudia Aradau and Rens Van Munster, ‘Governing Terrorism Through Risk’, European journal of international relations. 2007 13: 89-115.
The legal issues relating to new wars -
Romeo Dallaire, Shake hands with the devil : the failure of humanity in Rwanda,
Etzioni, ‘Genocide Prevention in the New Global Architecture’, British journal of politics & international relations., vol. 7., No. 4,
King and La Rosa, ‘Jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international. 1998, Vol. 9, No. 4.,
Beth Dougherty, ‘Right-Sizing of International Criminal Justice’, International affairs., vol. 80(2)
Marc Weller, ‘Undoing the Global Constitution: UN Security Council Action on the ICC’, International affairs., vol. 78, no. 4,
Ralph, ‘The United States and the International Criminal Court’, Review of international studies. 2005,
Christopher Rudolph, ‘Constructing Atrocities Regimes: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals’, International organization., vol 55, no. 3,
William A. Schabas, ‘United States Hostility to the International Criminal Court’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., vol. 15, no. 4,
Wedgewood, ‘The International Criminal Court: An American View’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 1999, Vol 10, No. 1,
Pellet, ‘Can a State Commit a Crime? ’ European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 1999, Vol 10, No.2,
Wippman, The International Criminal Court’ in Reus-Smit ed, The politics of international law,
Tochilovsky, ‘Globalizing Criminal Justice: Challenges for the International Criminal Court’, Global governance : a review of multilateralism and international organizations., 9(3).
And the issue of terrorism -
Borelli, Casting Light on the Legal Black Hole: International Law and Detentions abroad in the War on Terror’, International review of the Red Cross, vol. 857,
Zayas, ‘Human Rights and Indefinite Detention’, International review of the Red Cross, vol. 857,
Sassoli, ‘State Responsibility for violations of international humanitarian law’, International review of the Red Cross, vol. 846,
Bugnion, ‘The Geneva Conventions of the 12st August 1949’, International affairs. 76(1),
Michaelsen, ‘Derogating from International Human Rights Obligations in the War Against Terrorism’, Terrorism and political violence., 17(1-2),
Krish, ‘International Law in Times of Hegemony’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 16(3),
Johns, ‘Guantanamo Bay and the Annihilation of the Exception’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 16(4),
Kretzmer, ‘Target Killing of Suspected Terrorists’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 16(2),
Warbrick, ‘The European Response to Terrorism in an Age of Human Rights’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 15(5),
Neumann, ‘Counter-Terrorist Operations and the Rule of law’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 15(5),
Roberts, ‘Righting Wrongs or Wronging Rights: The United States and Human Rights post 9/11’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 15(4),
Fitzpatrick, ‘Speaking Law to Power: The War Against Terrorism and Human Rights’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international., 14(2),
Schorlemer, ‘Human Rights: Substantive and Institutional Implications of the War Against Terrorism’, European journal of international law = Journal européen de droit international. 14(2)..
The system of sovereign states was premised on a capacity to wage effective war. Recently, an argument has appeared about whether there is a new kind of warfare in the world and analysts have wondered whether the state is particularly well adapted to this new type of war. The most powerful states have the most powerful armies but are these armies best suited to conflicts involving civilians and intelligence led conflicts such as the war on terror? In particular, during the 1990s there was concern about internal civil conflict and the often poor response of the international community. Since 9/11 this agenda has been made even more complex by the new issue of terrorism. In this section, consider the new challenges facing the state from the so-called ‘new wars’. Can the so-called war on terror be made compatible with liberal freedoms? On the other hand, some argue that there is nothing that new about ‘new wars’ and that is a question of adapting and strengthening existing structures.
Week Ten - Pooling Sovereignty
Seminar Questions: Are international organizations vital for the international relations?
‘Theory and International Institutions’, Interview with Robert Keohane - http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people4/Keohane/keohane-con0.html
Robert Cooper, The Breaking of Nations: Order and Chaos in the 21st Century, (2003)
Best, ‘Peace Conferences and the Century of Total War: the 1899 Hague Conferences and what came After’, International affairs., 75(3),
Whittaker – United Nations in Action,
Rogers – Losing Control
Reus-Smit, The politics of international law,
H.G. Nicholas, The United Nations as a Political Institution,
Rittberger, Global governance and the United Nations system
Coicaud and Heiskanen, The legitimacy of international organizations,
S. Gareis, The United Nations : an introduction,
P. Baehr, The United Nations : reality and idealISBN: 1403949050 (pbk); 1403949042 (cloth),
Price and Zacher, The United Nations and global security,
*A Grigorescu, ‘Making the UN Work: League of Nations Analogy: Are there still lessons to be learned from the League’, Global governance : a review of multilateralism and international organizations., Vol 11 (1),
Luck, ‘How not to Reform the United Nations;, Global governance : a review of multilateralism and international organizations. 11(4), Security Dialogue,
Weiss and Young, ‘Compromise and Credibility: Security Council Reform’, Security Dialogue, 36(2),
Brown, ‘State Sovereignty, Federation and Kantian Cosmopolitanism’, European journal of international relations., 11(4),
Wendt’, ‘Why a World State is Inevitable’, European journal of international relations., 9(4),
Lake, ‘The Importance of Security Institutions’, International security., 26(1),
Berdal, ‘The UN Security Council: Ineffective but Indespensable’, Survival., 45(2),
Simma, The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary (2002),
Partington, John S., H.G. Wells and the world state: a liberal cosmopolitan in a totalitarian age, International relations., 17(2) 2003 June, 233-246.
Held, McGrew, Goldblatt and Perraton: Global transformations : politics, economics and culture (1999)
Since the late 19th Century states have pooled sovereignty in response to global problems. International organizations are now a permanent feature of the international system. There is much debate about their power and relevance, however. The record of the UN, for example, like the League of Nations, is not that good. However, the question of reform is now an important one. Can IOs be reformed and do they present a challenge to the state or are they there to supplement and support the state? Is, as Wendt claims, a world state an inevitable product of contemporary developments? What is the relationship between international relations theory and the development of international organizations? Cosmopolitan theory has also offered perspectives on global governance and international organisations – how convincing are these?
This list was last updated on 10/09/2021