methodology and theory of international relations
TRANSCRIPT
1
INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES ST. AUGUSTINE CAMPUS
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
Postgraduate Diploma in International Relations
INRL 5008 Methodology and Theory of International Relations
Dr. Nand C. Bardouille
SEMESTER I
ACADEMIC YEAR 2020 – 2021
2
INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (IIR) THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES, ST. AUGUSTINE
Methodology and Theory of International Relations
Postgraduate Diploma Course INRL 5008
Dr. Nand C. Bardouille
Email: [email protected]
Office hours online: Wednesday 5pm–6pm and Thursday 5pm–6pm or by appointment
Class times online: Tuesdays 5pm – 8pm (5pm–6:30pm; 6:30pm–7:00pm; 7:00pm–7:45pm)
Mode of Delivery
This course will be delivered online, leveraging zoom teleconference, online activities and assignments.
Description
The purpose of this course is to introduce students to the conceptualization, understanding and
application of theory in International Relations (IR). The course begins with a brief introduction on the
approaches to analysis within the discipline, ontology and epistemology, methodology and so on. This
prepares students, firstly, for the discussion note and later the main coursework essay, which invites them
to reflect on issues of what constitutes IR and how to ' do' the discipline. Secondly, it gives students the
necessary grounding with which to examine, understand and analyse the varied theoretical approaches
which are addressed within the course. They include classical theories like idealism and realism. This
forms the basis for consideration of mainstream IR theory, having an eye to structural realism, liberalism,
neoliberal institutionalism and cosmopolitanism, and the so-called 'neo-neo' debate. Alternatives are also
examined, from the Constructivist turn in IR to critical theories such as Marxism and dependency theory,
as well as some critical perspectives: neoGramscianism & Feminist IR theory. Finally, we explore the making
of 'Global IR'. The course ends with a plenary session in which students have to apply their theoretical
knowledge to a realworld problem. Thereafter, there will be a course wrap-up. In sum, this course should
provide students with a broad introductory appreciation of IR theory, and consequently the theoretical
tools which they require for success in the remainder of The UWI IIR's PGDip programme.
Aims
By the end of the course, students will be able to: Demonstrate a coherent understanding of different analytical approaches and theoretical
traditions in IR;
Recognise and analyse critically the different concepts, theories and subtheories within the
different traditions identified;
Apply these skills to a range of assessments – both oral and written – which aim to offer a
sophisticated and incisive critique of contemporary IR Theory.
3
Organization and Teaching Methods There is an onus upon you, the student, to take responsibility for your own independent study: at
postgraduate level there should be little spoonfeeding of information, and much of your learning will
take place outside of the classroom. It is up to you to read widely, engage seriously with the literature, and use both the classes and the time between them productively. The structure of the course is oriented
in a manner that will make best use of the time available, leveraging synchronous & asynchronous learning.
The respective classes—with the exception of those scheduled for 15th September, 6th October and 1st December—are divided up into three learning sessions as follows:1
Each webconference begins as a synchronous learning environment, i.e. students and lecturer are online simultaneously at scheduled seminar sessions. In the case of the first learning session, please be advised:
• Lecturer-moderated class discussions, which are informed/driven by reading responses: 5pm–5:30pm; • Lecturer presentation, making provision for ad hoc class discussions and debate: 5:30pm–6:30pm.
In the case of the asynchronous learning session (i.e. lecturer assigns students task(s), which they engage one another on, and he won't be on hand), it will be held from: 6:30pm–7:00pm. More details will follow.
Second & final synchronous learning session of the class (i.e. key takeaways & wrap-up): 7:00pm–7:45pm.2
Requirements
Students are expected to attend classes regularly and to be present for at least 75% of the class
duration. Punctuality is highly regarded. If you have an unavoidable absence you are expected to
communicate with the lecturer beforehand or soon after the class. You are expected to be present
for your group presentations. Students should not be absent for more than one third of the classes
without a medical certificate or other very strong justification. Repeated absence may well result
in failure of the course. This is a semester-long postgraduate level seminar, which requires a high level of commitment.
Students are required to actively and constructively participate in a series of structured and
focused seminar discussions, which will be informed by readings, and asynchronous learning.
Reading in advance of seminars. The course outline will have a number of key readings for
each topic, which you must read at the very minimum. These will be denoted by an
asterisk*. Other references will also be advised and you are strongly encouraged to read as
many of these as possible. Please note that the reading list is not exhaustive! You should
actively search out other interesting sources (books, journal articles, policy briefings,
newspapers, websites, and even videos) that speak to the issues at hand.
Course Assessment and Weight % Students will be assessed throughout this course. Course Assessment: 100% coursework,3 as follows: 1. Reading responses (Individual assignment): 10% Each student will prepare reading responses as regards each one of the required readings for each week's class. In the case of each reading, students must list: (i) two discussion points on issues that stood out as
1 More details on the orientation/format of the 6th October and 1st December classes will follow. 2 Our Zoom sessions: two hours and forty-five minutes, ending 15 min. early (as there are no breaks during the class). 3 All assignments must be submitted in Times New Roman 12 font size.
4
t
most important; and (ii) two questions on issues that require clarification/explanation. These weekly submissions should be no more than two-pages max. in length (typed, double-space). Submit via email to lecturer and send to classmates (via email or other agreed means) every Monday no later than at noon. 2. Class discussions and debates (online synchronous): 10% The first half-hour of each class will be informed/driven by student-centred class discussions and debate, with other synchronous learning sessions of the class thereafter affording an opportunity for students to exchange views with the course lecturer on the topic of the given class (and issues arising from same). Students are expected to advance thoughtful and reasoned deliberations on the themes and (at least) assigned required readings, with their course assessment linked, in part, to their ability to do so. 3. Discussion Note (Individual assignment): 20% Prepare a discussion note, which sets out perspective(s), in response to the following: IR scholars are said to have an intellectual commitment to either "explaining" or "understanding" in their academic discipline, resulting in the 'two purported camps' tending to talk past one another. Discuss. The discussion note, which may adhere to a less formal paper outline, should be 1000 words (maximum), and this assignment is due on Friday, 16th October. Email to the course lecturer. The discussion note will be graded on the following criteria: 1) clarity, 2) independent
understanding, 3) analytical skill, 4) range of reading, 5) critical engagement with the literature,
6) structure, 7) referencing, and 8) the accuracy and presentation of the bibliography. Your discussion note should be submitted directly to Turnitin.
More details on this assignment will follow. 4. Plenary Presentations – online synchronous (Group assignment): 20% Students will be placed into pairs (or groups of three depending on class number) no later than. The presentations are scheduled for Tuesday, 1st December. The question is:
Critically analyse a real‐world problem, issue or episode of your choice with reference to the theoretical literature in IR. (E.g., COVID-19's impact on the Caribbean.)
Students should not seek to describe every theory of IR: this presentation is not testing your ability
to regurgitate everything covered in class. The best presentations will be those that choose one or two
theoretical debates with which to engage, and evaluate a carefully chosen empirical issue against them.
Good presentations usually pose an appropriate critical question at the outset which they then attempt
to address, and they are marked by brevity, a tight analytical focus, good balance between
explanation/description and analysis, and they probe a theory deeply (i.e. they grapple with different
controversies within a body of theory rather than just offering a superficial engagement with it).
The presentation must be 15 minutes long (maximum). Any group that exceeds this time limit will
automatically forfeit their chance of achieving an Agrade. The presentation must also be
accompanied by a four-page (maximum) handout (typed, double-space) — emailed to myself no
later than Friday, 27th November. (The handout will factor into respective marks for this assignment.)
Your presentations will be graded on: 1) Clarity of Presentation, 2) Quality of Analysis, 3) Innovation,
4) Teamwork. More details will follow on the schedule for and organization of these presentations.
5
5. Essay (Individual assignment): 40% There is a choice of five questions from which to choose one:
1. What is IR theory and what purpose does it serve? 2. Critically assess the argument that democratic states will not go to war with each other. Illustrate your argument with examples. 3. Much of what the world has witnessed in the last decade cannot be sufficiently explained by any one theory of IR. Critically assess the foregoing statement.
4. For some theorists, the behaviour of states is determined primarily by their internal characteristics. By contrast, other theorists argue that state behaviour is shaped primarily by their position in the international system, and especially by their relative power. Which view do you think is most accurate? 5. Recent events have led many to argue that Realism is resurgent. Discuss.
The essay should be 2000 words (maximum), and this assignment is due on Friday, 4th December. Email to the course lecturer. The paper will be graded on the following criteria: 1) clarity, 2) independent understanding, 3)
analytical skill, 4) range of reading, 5) critical engagement with the literature, 6) structure, 7)
referencing, and 8) the accuracy and presentation of the bibliography. Your essay should be submitted directly to Turnitin.
Policy on extensions and missed deadlines Requests for extensions on the coursework will only be considered in cases of genuine emergency, with
documentary evidence required. To ensure the smooth progression of the course, the maximum
extension I am prepared to give in any eventuality will be one week. If you require a longer extension
than this, you will simply have to withdraw from the course and take it next year instead. If you submit the discussion note, group presentation handout and essay late and without an agreed
extension, but within a week of the deadline, I will still grade it and give you feedback, but it will be
returned with a maximum mark of 50%. If you submit the discussion note, group presentation handout
and essay after this – or do not submit at all – you will receive failing grade of zero. Any discussion note,
group presentation handout and essay that is more than 10% over or under the word limit will also only be
returned with a maximum mark of 50%.
University Grading Scheme (graduate programming)
Grade Percent
A 70 – 100
B+ 60 – 69
B 50 – 59
F 0 – 49
6
Plagiarism UWI is committed to the highest standards of academic integrity and honesty. Students are expected to
be familiar with the standards regarding academic honesty and to uphold the policies of the University
in this respect. Students are particularly urged to familiarize themselves with the guide for staff and
students (http://sta.uwi.edu/resources/documents/postgrad/guidelines_staff_students_plagarism.pdf)
and avoid any behaviour that could potentially result in suspicions of cheating, plagiarism,
misrepresentation of facts and/or participation in an offence (all of which could result in expulsion from
UWI). Please make sure that you acquaint yourself well with the UWI/IIR Graduate Policy on Plagiarism:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3y5ru75wt0mn7rg/Graduate%20policy%20on%20plagiarism.pdf
How to write well If you struggle with writing (or even if your writing is very good and you want to improve it further) you
can seek onetoone coaching by making use of the UWI writing centre (advert below).
At the postgraduate level, you have to read widely and you must read proper academic sources. Anyone
can read 2 or 3 journal articles per week, per course, and if you cannot do this, then you probably should
not be doing a postgraduate degree. Weak papers tend to eschew proper academic literature for
questionable internet sources, and they tend to define concepts with reference to dictionaries rather
than via a critical engagement with the relevant academic debate. As a general rule of thumb, 80% of
the sources in your bibliography should be a mixture of books, book chapters, and articles from genuine
scholarly journals; it is okay to have some news or journalistic sources and technical papers from
institutions like the IMF or World Bank, but these should never form more than about 20% of your
bibliography. If they do, then, quite simply, you haven’t engaged sufficiently with the relevant academic
literature, and it’s highly likely that your analysis will lack depth and insight as a result.
7
Accepting the question (or the premise of it) at face value All questions have embedded within them a series of assumptions, and these need to be problematized
(i.e. subjected to critical scrutiny). Once you recognise this, and begin your papers by unpicking the
hidden assumptions within the question (and, as a consequence, their broader implications) you are
already half way to developing a structure for analysis. This is particularly so on this course because
most of the questions – in the first paper, at least – are designed with an unresolved theoretical and
methodological controversy in mind. At the very least, you should begin every paper you write (and
exam question, too) by explaining what you understand the question to mean, and justifying your broad
answer to it, even if that answer is an equivocal one which involves you sitting on the fence. If you do
this clearly, it shows the examiner that you understand both the problem at hand and the implications
to which it gives rise, and it assures them that the essay is likely to unfold in a coherent way. Structure Structure is critical. Weak papers often have paragraphs of inconsistent length. It is important to begin
by problematizing the question, and explaining how the paper will address it, and why you will do it in
such a way. In a longer paper, it is important to use subheadings to break up the text and give it
analytical focus. These are easy things to do if you have done some reading and plan your answer to the
question well. Any question which requires a 20003000 word answer can be broken down into 23 sub
questions or puzzles. These questions can then be addressed systematically in one section after another,
in turn allowing you to build a coherent and focused answer to the overarching question. You should
always conclude by explaining clearly what your overarching answer to the question is; stronger papers
always go beyond this, though, and reflect on the wider implications of the foregoing analysis.
Poor Referencing (and bibliographical presentation) There is no excuse for reaching postgraduate level not having learned to reference accurately,
particularly with the support available from the IIR Library and the UWI Writing Centre. Mixing and
matching footnotes and intext citations: You should ONLY use ONE referencing style (either intext
citations OR footnotes) and never change during a paper. The only situation in which you might use both
is when you use the intext system and have footnotes for points of clarification but NOT references.
Also, you must present all of the required information for every single source you use, to indicate the
information that you are citing in the text is valid. Therefore, it isn’t enough to simply put a web address
as this means nothing. What is the source? Who is the author? When was it published? Where was it
published? If you cannot provide this information, then this is not a suitable source to use in academic
work.
Referencing is an extremely important skill that you must develop while at university. So if you struggle
with it, then please come and see me for advice. Also, use a referencing program: Zotero, Endnote,
CiteUwrite etc. will all help you keep track of sources, and ensure consistency in your bibliographies. Poor use of source material The key thing that is being tested in an essay is the extent to which you have read a wide range of
academic literature, digested it, and can draw on it to add weight to your arguments. It is crucial, in this
sense, that you support your arguments and ideas with evidence from the literature. The best papers
are those that are clearly driven by their own analytical agenda, with the literature providing the fuel for
the engine. By contrast, an even worse problem, though, is when students have not digested the
8
literature at all. This usually manifests itself in excessive numbers of quotes, and, especially, long quotes
(23 lines or more). Simply copying and pasting massive quotes from a source earns you no credit. It
shows no critical engagement with the literature, and is especially problematic when, as is often the
case, little attempt is made to contextualise the long quote (i.e. to introduce it, and then explain its
significance afterwards). A long quote CANNOT do YOUR analytical work for you. Its value is not
selfevident, so if you do quote someone at length, there should, firstly, be a good reason for doing so
(i.e. because the point the person makes is so important that it must be quoted verbatim and cannot
simply be paraphrased), and, secondly, you need to explain why it matters in the context of the analysis
that you’re advancing. Of course, you should use quotes regularly (but sparingly) to support your arguments. But they should
not overwhelm your paper, or obscure your analysis. It should be your analytical agenda doing the
driving; you should be able to summarise the literature, having read and digested it, and, for the most
part, you should be paraphrasing authors, and summarising their arguments in your own words (but
obviously still providing a reference, since it is their ideas you are drawing on). When you use direct
quotes, they must be in ‘quote marks’, and if you use a longer quote (again, more than 23 lines) make
sure you INDENT it (and remove the quote marks), and that you go on to explain its significance.
The Norman Girvan Library
The IIR-based Norman Girvan Library is an important informational resource, which all IIR students should
make use of accordingly. Like The UWI's Alma Jordan Library, it offers a wide range of services, including on
referencing. According to the library's mission statement, "[t]he Institute houses the most comprehensive
collection of information resources in the world on the international relations of the Caribbean."
Continuing Learning Beyond Class Sessions
Students are encouraged to continue the discussion beyond the weekly course classes, and to augment the
in-class learning space not only by way of individual learning but also via group chats, or other means of
facilitating collaboration and peer learning, e.g. study/reading groups.
Accommodations for Students with Disabilities
Students should refer to The UWI St. Augustine Campus Student Disability Policy:
https://sta.uwi.edu/resources/policies/Student_Disability.pdf
The Code of Principles and Responsibilities for Students
Please refer to and be guided by: https://sta.uwi.edu/resources/documents/conduct.pdf
You are hereby prohibited from reproducing, re-publishing, re-broadcasting, re-posting, re-transmitting or
transferring in whole or in part any Course Outlines, Course Materials or Lectures which have been provided to
you as part of your course of study at The University of the West Indies (The UWI), without the prior permission
of The UWI its authorised agents or copyright holders.
9
Hobson, J M and S Hobden Historical Sociology of International Relations
(Cambridge: CUP, 2002) Hobson, J M
Jackson, R and G Sorenson
Kegley, C & Wittkopf, E.
Knight, WA and T Keating
The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: Western
International Theory, 17602010 (Cambridge: CUP,
2012) Introduction to International Relations: Theories and
Approaches (6th Edition, Oxford: OUP, 2015)
World Politics: Trends and transformations (Thomson
Wadsworth, Australia, 2006) Global Politics (Oxford: OUP, 2010)
Little, R. & Smith, M Perspectives on World Politics (London: Routledge,
2005) Ravenhill, J. (Ed)
Global Political Economy (Oxford: OUP, 2011, 3rd Edition)
Reading List Core Reading There are many useful core texts in IR (and in related disciplines such as Political Science and IPE) which provide good overviews of the field. However, textbooks, in particular, can only ever provide an introduction, and you should move quickly beyond these and engage at a deeper level with primary texts and articles. If you avoid grappling with serious IR literature, you will run into trouble quickly.
Textbooks and other important books on IR Theory Brown, C and K. Ainley Understanding International Relations (London: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2009, 4th Edition)
Baylis, J., Smith, S. and Owens, P (Eds) The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, Oxford: OUPR, 7th Edition 2017. Burchill, S and Linklater. A (Eds) Theories of International Relations (London: Macmillan, 4th Edition, 2009) Cerny, P. Rethinking World Politics (Oxford: OUP, 2010). Dunne, T., Kurki, M., and S Smith (Eds) International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity
(Oxford: OUP, 2010, 2nd Edition)
Griffiths, M (Ed) International Relations Theory for the Twenty First Century (New York: Routledge, 2007)
Heywood, A Global Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2011)
10
00Tickner, A B and O Waever (Eds) International Relations Scholarship Around the World: Worlding Beyond the West (London: Routledge, 2009)
Van Der Pijl, K. A Survey of Global Political Economy, 2009,
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/ir/1471.html On questions of analysis, methods, ontology, epistemology and the state Burham, P (et al) Research methods in Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2008, 2nd Edition) Campbell, C et al (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Institutional Analysis (Oxford:
OUP, 2009) Gowan, P. Research Methods in International Relations (London:
Routledge, 2011) Krasner, S. Power, the State and Sovereignty: Essays on International
Relations (London: Routledge, 2009, 1st Edition)
Hay, C (Ed) New Directions in Political Science (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010)
Lamont, C. Research Methods in International Relations (London:
Sage Publications Inc., 2015) Marsh, D and Stoker, G Theory and Methods in Political Science (London: Palgr-
ave Macmillan, 2010, 3rd Edition) Websites and News Sources You should keep abreast of ‘realworld’ events during the course, but newspaper sources should
generally not be the main focus of essays and analyses on IR Theory. Empirical analysis is obviously an
important backdrop for the things we discuss on the course, but only insofar as it helps us think through
different theoretical traditions within IR. In terms of broader IR debates, you should also regularly check the Project Syndicate website which has
articles from leading commentators (which are then syndicated to major global newspapers such as Le
Monde, The Guardian, The New York Times and so on). In particular, Dani Rodrik, Robert Skidelsky,
Jeffrey Sachs, Naomi Wolf, Joseph Nye and Joseph Stiglitz offer excellent commentary on global issues:
http://www.projectsyndicate.org/. EIR is also a very good resource http://www.eir.info/ Also check out:
www.theory-talks.org
MyELearning
For course updates and material, please regularly check MyELearning.
11
Course Calendar
Date Discussion and Lecture Topic
15th September Introduction to the Course
What is International Relations?
22nd September The Treaty of Westphalia, Sovereignty and the State in
IR: A Critical Assessment
29th September Historiographical Considerations in (Western) IR: The
Quest for 'Origins' via Typologies of the Classic Canon
of Western Political Thought, and on to an "American
Social Science"
6th October Ontology, Epistemology and Methodology in IR;
Research Methods;4 Paradigm; Levels of Analysis;
Structure and Agency; the Great Debates: A Snapshot
13th October The Beginnings of a Discipline? Idealism as the
precursor for Liberalism, and more
20th October Classical Realism and Structural Realism
27th October Neoliberal Institutionalism and Cosmopolitanism; the
'NeoNeo' Debate
3rd November The Constructivist Turn in IR
10th November Marxism, Dependency Theory and NeoGramscianism
17th November Whither Critical Theory?: The Case of Feminist IR Theory
24th November Global International Relations in the Making
1st December Plenary/Class Presentations (Group assignment) &
Course Wrap-up, incl. a closer look at Great Debates Disclaimer: This course calendar should be viewed as a planning tool and in some cases due to unforeseen circumstances, the course calendar, syllabus, and/or interactive sessions could be changed. Students will be notified ahead of time of any changes and updated accordingly.
Class Sessions and the Four-part Division of the Course
There will be twelve online class sessions, which are divided into four parts. Part 1 (Topics 1-3): IR's (Western) Historical Development, Key Concepts and Traditions; Part 2 (Topic 4): Paradigms and Philosophies of Research: Insights into the Nature and Purposes of IR Schools of Thought; Part 3 (Topics 5-11): Theoretical Perspectives in and Debates informing the Study of IR; Part 4: Stocktaking of the Course, and more.
The COVID-19 Moment, IR and INRL 5008
COVID-19 has seemingly emerged as the most pressing challenge confronting the world today, its complex realities having rapidly disrupted (indeed, having pervasively ensconced themselves at the centre of) diplomacy and global affairs. Even so, the situation's dynamics have the potential to shape politics among nations in the coming years, setting many of the conditions for and trends in international politics. In taking INRL 5008 at this juncture, you will have an opportunity to draw on key, oft-contending IR theoretical perspectives to help make sense of the COVID-19 moment. We will routinely look at the nexus between the COVID-19 crisis and IR, considering that the pandemic offers the clearest and most topical case example of how IR theories provide a lens through which one can view the contemporary world around us and get a handle on the role of salient actors, structures and processes.
4 Guest lecture.
Part 1
Part 3
Part 4
Part 2
12
Topic 1 – What is International Relations? Before the discipline of International Relations, there was the study of international relations i.e. the
influence of ‘external’ practices, ideas and institutions on societies around the world. This lecture provides
an overview of the ‘deep roots’ of international relations. Its main point is that ‘international relations’
has a longer, deeper and broader history than that of modern Europe. Key questions to think about when
reading: What is IR, and what is IR Theory? At all times, questions asked during the term: What different
theories are there in IR, and why do we have so many of them? What kinds of issues do they tend to be
interested in, and how is the knowledge created in IR generally constructed? How close are the links between
the concepts and issues we use to understand/explain/describe the world, and actual events and processes
in world politics? *Haber, S H, Kennedy, D M and Krasner, S D
*Kaplan, M A
‘Brothers under the Skin: Diplomatic History and International
Relations’, International Security, 22, 1, 1997 ‘Is International Relations a Discipline?’ The Journal of Politics, 23, 3, 1961
*Smith, S. ‘Paradigm Dominance in International Relations: The
Development of International Relations as a Social Science ’,
Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 16, 2, 1987 Buzan, B and Little, R Hurrell, A. Kaufman, S
‘Why International Relations has failed as an academic project
and what to do about it’, Millennium: Journal of International
Studies, 30, 1, 2001 ‘Towards the Global Study of International Relations’, Revista Brasileira de Politica Internacional, 59, 2, 2016 ‘Approaches to Global Politics in the TwentyFirst Century: A Review Essay’, International Studies Review, 1, 2, 1999
Nicholson, M ‘What’s the use of International Relations?’ Review of
International Studies, 26, 2, 2000 Cello, L ‘Taking History Seriously in IR: Towards a Historicist Approach’,
Review of International Studies, 44, 2, 2018
Bell, D ‘Writing the world: Disciplinary History and Beyond’, Internat-
ional Affairs, 85, 1, 2009
Snyder, J ‘One World, Rival Theories’, Foreign Policy, 140,
November/December 2004
Walt, Stephen M Holsti, K J
‘International Relations: One World, Many Theories’, Foreign
Policy, 110, 1998
‘Along the Road to International Theory’, International Journal, 39
2, 1984
Dunn, F S ‘The Scope of International Relations’, World Politics 1, 1, 1948
13
Topic 2 – The Treaty of Westphalia, Sovereignty and the State in IR:
A Critical Assessment
In (Western) IR there is a standard tool-kit of concepts and terms that one must be familiar with in order
to engage with the subject matter. This lecture reviews some of those foundational concepts and terms,
providing a critical view of same. Key questions to think about when reading: What is the Westphalian
state system? Has the Westphalian model of state sovereignty come under challenge? If so, how? Explain. Is
sovereignty always upheld as sacrosanct? Provide examples.
*Hobson, J M, Carvalho, B and H Leira ‘The Big Bangs of IR: The Myths that your teachers still tell you
about 1648 and 1919’, Millennium: Journal of International
Studies, 39, 3, 2011
*Moloney, P ‘Hobbes, Savagery and International Anarchy’, American
Political Science Review, 105, 1, 2011
*Miller, J.D.B. ‘The Sovereign State and its Future’, International Journal, 39,
2, 1984
*Paul, D ‘Sovereignty, Survival and the Westphalian Blind Alley in Interna-
tional Relations’, Review of International Studies, 25, 2, 1999
*Ayoob, M ‘Humanitarian Intervention and State Sovereignty’, The
International Journal of Human Rights, 6, 1, 2002
Krasner, S D ‘Sharing Sovereignty: New Institutions for Collapsed and Failing
States’, International Security, 29, 2, 2004
Stahn, C ‘Responsibility to Protect: Political Rhetoric or Emerging Legal Norm?’ American Journal of International Law, 101, 1, 2007
Ashley, R K ‘Untying the Sovereign State: A Double Reading of the Anarchy Problematique, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 17, 2, 1988
Linklater, A The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era. (Cambridge: Polity, 1998)
Teschke, B ‘Debating 'The Myth of 1648': State Formation, the Interstate
System and the Emergence of Capitalism in Europe — A Rejoinder,"
International Politics, 43, 5, 2006
Teschke, B ‘Theorising the Westphalian System of States: International
Relations from Absolutism to Capitalism," European Journal of
International Relations, 8, 1, 2002
McCourt, D M ‘The Inquiry and the Birth of International Relations, 1917-19’,
Australian Journal of Politics & History, 63, 3, 2017
14
Topic 3 – Historiographical Considerations in (Western) IR: The Quest for 'Origins' via Typologies of the Classic Canon of Western Political
Thought, and on to an "American Social Science"
It is said that in tracing the intellectual roots of (Western) IR, one must look at “traditions of IR.” In this lecture, we do just that. We are interested in framing (Western) IR’s intellectual currents along the lines of typologies, pinpointing how the discipline has apparently evolved into an "American social science." Key Questions to think about when reading: What are the three “traditions of IR”? What is the significance of scholars connecting this relatively young academic discipline to some of the classic canon of Western political thought? That IR has apparently established itself as an “American social science” does not sit well for many. What is the controversy about? And why should it matter?
*Wight, M ‘Why is there no International Theory?’ International Relations, 2, 1, 1960
*Vergerio, C ‘Context, Reception, and the Study of Great Thinkers in
International Relations’, International Theory, 11, 1, 2019
*Kristensen, P M ‘Revisiting the “American Social Science”—Mapping the Geography of
International Relations’, International Studies Perspectives, 16, 3,
2015
Ahrensdorf, P J ‘Thucydides’ Realistic Critique of Realism’, Polity, 30, 2, 1997
Hurrell, A ‘Kant and the Kantian Paradigm in International Relations’, Review of
International Studies 16, 3, 1990
Cutler, A C ‘The 'Grotian Tradition' in International Relations’, Review of
International Studies 17, 1, 1991
Little, R ‘Historiography and International Relations’, Review of International
Studies 25, 2, 1999
Smith, S ‘The Discipline of International Relations: Still an American Social
Science?’, The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2,
3, 2000
Hoffmann, S ‘An American Social Science: International Relations’, Daedalus, 106,
3, 1977
Boucher, D Political Theories of International Relations: From Thucydides to the
Present (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998)
Johnson, L M Thucydides, Hobbes, and the Interpretation of Realism (DeKalb:
Northern Illinois University Press, 1993)
Parry, J T ‘What is the Grotian Tradition in International Law?’ University of
Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 35, 2, 2014
Dunne, T Inventing International Society: A History of the English School
(Houndmills: Palgrave, 1998)
15
Buzan, B ‘The English School: An Underexploited Resource in IR’, Review of
International Studies, 27, 3, 2001
Hoffmann, S ‘International Relations: The Long Road to Theory’, World Politics, 11,
3, 1959
Topic 4 – Ontology, Epistemology and Methodology in IR; Research Methods; Paradigm; Levels of Analysis; Structure and Agency; the Great
Debates: A Snapshot
Key Questions to think about when reading: What are ontology and epistemology? Which comes first?
To what extent do we need to think about them when engaging in the analysis of IR? Are they just
philosophical issues which should not concern us? What are the implications of ontology and
epistemology for IR Theory? What implications do they have for the methodologies we employ? In what
way is the concept of ‘paradigm shift’ helpful to you as a student of IR, namely, in framing its study?
*Friedrichs, J and Kratochwil, F
*Wight, C
Hollis, M and Smith, S
Mearsheimer, J and Walt, S
‘On Acting and Knowing: How Pragmatism can Advance
International Relations Research and Methodology,’
International Organization, 63, 4, 2009 ‘Inside the Epistemological Cave all Bets are Off’, Journal
of International Relations and Development, 10, 1, 2007 ‘Beware of Gurus: Structure and Agency in International
Relations’, Review of International Studies, 17, 4, 1991 ‘Leaving Theory Behind: Why Simplistic Hypothesis Testing
is Bad for International Relations’, European Journal of
International Relations, 19, 3, 2013
Debate: which comes first, ontology or epistemology? *Bates, S R and Jenkins,L
*Hay, C
*Marsh, D and P Furlong
*Bates, S R and L Jenkins
‘Teaching and Learning Ontology and Epistemology in
Political Science’, Politics, 27, 1, 2007 ‘Does Ontology Trump Epistemology? Notes on the
Direc-tional Dependence of Ontology and Epistemology
in Political Analysis’, Politics, 27, 2, 2007 ‘On Ontological and Epistemological Gatekeeping: A Reply
to Bates and Jenkins’, Politics, 27, 3 ‘In Defence of Pluralism in the Teaching and Learning of Ontology and Epistemology: A Reply to Hay, Marsh and
Furlong’, Politics, 27, 3
16
On Ontology and Epistemology more generally Borjana, A “Epistemological challenges of globalization to the
Westphalian thinking within International Relations.
JANUS.NET e-journal of International Relations, 9, 1,
May-October 2018.
Hay, C Leftwich, A Marsh, D and Stoker, G(Eds) Research Methods *Lamont, C (to be subjected to selective reading) Paradigm *Lombrozo, T Kuhn, T Levels of Analysis *Singer, J. D Buzan, B Structure and Agency *Wight, C
Political Analysis (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002) What is Politics? (Cambridge: Polity, 2004) Theory and Methods in Political Science (London: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2010, 3rd Edition) Various chapters
Research Methods in International Relations (London: Sage Public-
ations Inc., 2015)
What is a Paradigm Shift, Anyway? npr. July 18, 2016.
https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2016/07/18/486487713
/what-is-a-paradigm-shift-anyway
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press, 2012, 50th Anniversary Edition)
‘The level-of-analysis problem in international relations’, World
Politics, 14, 1, 1961
‘The Level of Analysis Problem in International Relations Recons-
idered’ in Booth, K and Smith, S (Ed.) International Relations
Theory Today (Cambridge, Polity Press: 1995)
‘They Shoot Dead Horses Don’t They? Locating Agency in the
AgentStructure Problématique’, European Journal of Interna-
tional Relations, 51, 1, 1999
The Great Debates: A Snapshot
*Lake, D ‘Theory is Dead, Long Live Theory: The End of the Great Debates
and the Rise of Eclecticism in International Relations’, European
Journal of International Relations, 19, 3, 2013
17
Topic 5 – The Beginnings of a Discipline? Idealism as the precursor for Liberalism, and more
Classical liberalism rests on a variety of sources, Kant, Wilson and Mill being particularly important.
Contrary to most of the tenets of realism, international behaviour is linked to regime-type, and
republics/liberal democracies are taken to be less warlike than monarchies/authoritarian regimes. In the
20th century, liberalism has been associated with the promotion of international institutions; the modern
version of liberalism (‘neoliberal institutionalism’ or ‘neoliberalism’ for short) . Key Questions to think
about when reading: Why were the ‘idealists’ called as such, and how did they view the world?
In what ways has idealism shaped contemporary liberalism? How plausible is an idealist approach
for managing global politics? Is liberalism in IR truly liberal?
*Jones, C ‘The Trouble with Carr’, in Jones, C. E.H. Carr and International
Relations. A Duty to Lie (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1998) *Doyle, M *Doyle, M Herz, J H Long, D
‘Liberalism and World Politics’, American Political Science Review, 80, 4, 1986
‘Kant, Liberal Legacies and Foreign Affairs’, Philosophy and
Public Affairs, 12, 34, 1983
‘Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma’, World
Politics, 2, 2, 1950
‘J.A. Hobson and Idealism in International Relations’, Review
of International Studies, 17, 3, 1991
Steele, BJ ‘LiberalIdealism: A Constructivist Critique’, International
Studies Review, 9, 1, 2007 Wilson, P ‘The Myth of the First Great Debate’, in T. Dunne, M Cox and
K. Booth, The Eighty Years Crisis 19191999 (Cambridge: CUP) Tucker, R W ‘The Triumph of Wilsonianism’, World Policy Journal, 10, 4, 1993/1994
Topic 6 – Classical Realism and Structural Realism The roots of realism can be found in texts by Thucydides, Augustine, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Rousseau and
many others, but as a fully-fledged theory of international relations it is a twentieth century product. In the
1930s and 1940s, realism took the form of a critique of idealism/utopianism, and came to be the dominant
approach in IR. Key questions to think about when reading: What is realism, and where does it come from?
What different variants of realism have there been over time, when did they emerge, and for what
reasons? According to Hans Morgenthau and E.H. Carr, what are the shortcomings of the ‘liberal project’?
*Dunne, T International Relations Theories (Oxford University Press, 2016,
(to be subjected to selective reading) 4th edition)
18
*HamatiAtaya, I
*Milner, H
*Rosenberg, J
*Ruggie, J.
Mann, M
‘Knowing and Judging in International Relations Theory:
Realism and the Reflexive Challenge’, Review of International
Studies, 36, 4, 2010
‘The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations Theory’,
Review of International Studies, 17, 1, 1991 ‘What’s the Matter with Realism?’ Review of International
Studies, 16, 4, 1990 ‘The False Premise of Realism’, International Security, Vol. 20,
1995.
‘The First Failed Empire of the 21st Century’, Review of
International Studies, 30, 4, 2004
Moloney, P ‘Hobbes, Savagery and International Anarchy’, American
Political Science Review, 105, 1, 2011
Morgenthau, H, J Politics Among Nations (New York: Alfred A. Knopf., 1948)
In the 1970s, Kenneth Waltz became the (reluctant?) progenitor of neo- or structural realism, re-orienting
realism around the notion of ‘anarchy’. Structural realism divides into ‘offensive realism’, ‘defensive realism’
and ‘neo-classical realism’. Key questions to think about when reading: Which strains of realism are most
influential today? How does structural or neorealism differ to classical realism? How well do
realist approaches explain contemporary IR? Why does neorealism generally remain dominant
in, especially, American International Relations? How plausible is the idea of hegemonic stability? Is
IR fundamentally a realist social science?
*Ashley, R. ‘The Poverty of Neo-Realism’, International Organization,
38, 2, 1984
*Krasner, S ‘Abiding Discord’, Review of International Political Economy, 1, 1, 1994
*Strange, S. ‘Wake up Krasner! The World Has Changed’, Review of International Political Economy, 1, 2, 1994
* Waltz, K ‘Structural Realism After the Cold War’, International Security, 25, 1, 2000 Foulon, M ‘Neoclassical Realism: Challengers and Bridging Identities’, International Studies Review, 17, 4, 2015 Grieco, J. ‘Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of
the Newest Liberal Institutionalism’, International Organizat- ion, 42, 3, 1988 Katzenstein, P, Keohane, R, ‘International Organization and the Study of World Politics’,
International Organization, 52, 4, 1998
and Krasner, S
19
Topic 7 – Neoliberal Institutionalism and Cosmopolitanism; the 'NeoNeo' Debate
The events of the last two decades, and especially of the two terms of George W. Bush’s presidency, have
raised questions for the liberal conception of international relations. The charge often made is that the
‘neo-conservative’ vision of the world is, in effect, a modern version of Wilsonian liberal internationalism.
Key Questions to think about when reading: What different variants of liberalism have there been over
time, when did they emerge, and for what reasons? Which strains of liberalism are most influential
today? How well do liberal approaches explain contemporary IR? To what extent is a liberal world order
the best way of arranging international affairs? At its core, what is the ‘inter-paradigm’ debate about? *Kratochwil, F and Ruggie, J *Cerny, P
*Gamble, A
*Ruggie, J G Guerrero, M G Fukuyama, F Harvey, D Harvey, D
‘International Organization: A State of the Art on an Art of the
State’, International Organization, 40,4, 1986
‘Embedding Neoliberalism: The Evolution of a Hegemonic
Paradigm’, The Journal of International Trade and Diplomacy,
2, 1, pp.1-46, 2008. ‘The Western Ideology’, Government and Opposition, 44, 1,
2009. ‘International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded
Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order’, International
Organization, 36, 2, 1982.
“Theoretically Thinking and Rethinking the international order: the new emerging international institutions through neo-institutionalist lenses.” JANUS.NET e-journal of International Relations, Vol.9, no2, November 2018 – April 2019. ‘The End of History?’ The National Interest, 16, 1989 A Brief History of Neoliberalism (Oxford: OUP, 2005). ‘Neoliberalism as Creative Destruction’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 610, 1, 2007
Keohane, R After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984)
Keohane, R and L Martin ‘The Promise of Institutionalist Theory’, International Security, 20, 1, 1995
Keohane, R and J Nye Mearsheimer, J
Richardson, J
Power and Interdependence (London: Longman, 2001, 2nd Ed) ‘The False Promise of International Institutions’, International
Security, 19, 3, 1994/5 ‘Contending Liberalisms: Past and Present’, European Journal of IR, 3, 1, 1997
20
On Cosmopolitanism
*Held, D ‘Cosmopolitanism: Globalization Tamed?’, Review of
International Studies, 29, 4, 2003 *Held, D
Appiah, K A
Beck, U
Beck, U and Cronin, C Brown, G and Held, D
Carpenter, T Gizatova, G K Lu, C The 'NeoNeo' Debate *Bell, D S A
*Dunne T, Hansen L and Wight C.
‘Violence, Law and Justice in a Global Age’, Constellations, 1, 9,
2002
Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers, London:
Penguin, 2007
Power in the Global Age: A New Global Political Economy,
Cambridge: Polity, 2005
Cosmopolitan Vision, Cambridge: Polity, 2006
The Cosmopolitanism Reader (Oxford: Polity Press, 2004)
‘Realism vs. Idealism: Both Are Needed, but National Interest Should Come First’, American Conservative 17, 4, 2018
“Cosmopolitanism as a Concept and a Social Phenomenon’, Journal of History, Culture & Art Research, 6, 5, 2017
‘The One and Many Faces of Cosmopolitanism’, Journal of
Political Philosophy, 8, 2, 2002
‘Political Theory and the Functions of Intellectual History: A
Response to Emmanuel Navon’, Review of International Studies,
29, 1, 2003
‘The end of International Relations theory?’, European Journal of
International Relations, 19, 3, 2013
Long, D ‘J.A. Hobson and Idealism in International Relations’, Review of
International Studies, 17, 3, 1991
Ikenberry, J ‘Liberal Internationalism 3.0: America and the Dilemmas of
Liberal World Order’, Perspectives on Politics, 7, 1, 2009
Deudney, D and Ikenberry, J G ‘The Nature and Sources of Liberal International Order’, Review
of International Studies, 25, 2, 1999
Linklater, A ‘Liberal Democracy, Constitutionalism and the New World
Order’, in Leaver, R L and Richardson, J L (eds.), Charting the
Post-Cold War Order (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1993)
21
Topic 8 – The Constructivist Turn in IR The meaning and nature of constructivism are contested. The most prominent constructivist from the
perspective of mainstream IR theory is Alexander Wendt. Key Questions to think about when reading:
What role do ideas play in constructivism? When and why did this body of thought emerge? What is
its relationship with other theories of IR? What different flavours of constructivism exist? Does it
overplay the role of ideas in international politics?
* Baele, S J and Bettiza, G ‘‘Turning’ everywhere in IR: on the sociological underpinnings of
the field’s proliferating turns’, International Theory, First View
*Adler, E ‘Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics’,
European Journal of International Relations, 3, 3, 1997
*Dessler, D ‘Constructivism within a Positivist Social Science’, Review of
International Studies, 25, 1, 1999
*Wendt, A ‘Anarchy is what States make of it: The Social Construction of
Power P olitics’, International Organization, Vol. 46, No. 2,
1992
*Wendt, A ‘Constructing International Politics’, International Security,
20, 1, 1995
Guzzini, S ‘The Concept of Power: A Constructivist Analysis’, Millennium:
Journal of International Relations, 33, 3, 2004
Marsh, D ‘Keeping Ideas in their Place: In Praise
of Thin Constructivism’, Australian Journal of Political Science,
4, 4, 2009
Hopf, T ‘The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations
Theory’, International Security, 23, 1, 1998
Wendt, A ‘Bridging the Theory/Meta Theory Gap in International
Relations’, Review of International Studies, 17, 4, 1991
Topic 9 – Marxism, Dependency Theory and NeoGramscianism
Critical theorists draw on a long line of scholarship that extends from Marx and Gramsci via the Frankfurt
School to modern day theorists such as Immanuel Wallerstein and, in IR, Robert Cox and Justin Rosenberg.
For ‘critical’ scholars, world politics is marked by historically constituted inequalities between core and
periphery, north and south, developed and underdeveloped. Key Questions to think about when
reading: What is Marxism and where does it come from? What is the importance of concepts such as
capital, class, hegemony, order, dependency, coreperiphery and world system or world order in the
Marxist tradition? How do they tend to understand the state? Do such approaches offer a plausible critique
of IR? What do they lack? Do Marxian approaches have any continued relevance to IR Theory today?
22
*Cardoso, F.
*Cox, R.
*Gamble, A
*Germain, R and M Kenny
*Maclean, J.
‘Dependency and Development in Latin America’, New Left
Review, 74, JulyAugust, 1972 ‘Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in
Method’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol.
12, No. 2, 1983. ALSO AVAILABLE IN Gill, S (ed) Gramsci,
Historical Materialism and International Relations,
(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1993) ‘Marxism after Communism: Beyond Realism and Historicism’,
Review of International Studies, 25, 5, 1999 ‘Engaging Gramsci: IR Theory and the New Gramscians’,
Review of International Studies, 24, 1, 1998 ‘Marxism and International Relations: A Strange Case of Mutual Neglect’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies,
17, 2, 1988
*Van Der Pijl, K. A Survey of Global Political Economy, 2009, Chapter 9, ‘Hegemony’. http://www.sussex.ac.uk/ir/1471.html
On Classical Marxism in IR and the Marxist tradition more broadly
Burnham, P ‘Open Marxism and Vulgar Political Economy’, Review of International
Political Economy, 1, 2, 1994
Callinicos, A ‘The Crisis of Our Time’, International Socialism, 132, 2011
Harvey, D The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism (London:
Profile, 2010)
Harvey, D A Companion to Marx’s Capital (London: Verso, 2010)
Lenin, V I Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism (Various editions
– originally published 1917)
http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imphsc/
Marx, K Capital: Critique of Political Economy, Vols 13 (Various
editions – originally published 1867)
Marx, K and Engels, F Manifesto of the Communist Party (Various editions –
originally published 1848)
http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html
23
On Dependency and World Systems Theory Cardoso, F and Faletto, E
Frank, A G and Gills, B
Frank, A G
Gills, B K
Gills, B K
Girvan, N
Hills, J.
Palma, G
Dependency and Development in Latin America (London:
University of California Press, 1979) The World System: Five Hundred Years or Five Thousand?
(London: Routledge, 1996, 2nd Edition)
‘The Development of Underdevelopment’ Monthly Review,
18, 4, 1966 ‘World System Analysis, Historical Sociology and International
Relations: The Difference a Hyphen Makes’, in Hobden and
Hobson (eds) Historical Sociology of International Relations,
2002. ‘In Memoriam: Andre Gunder Frank 24 February 1929 to 24
April 2005’, Globalizations, 2, 1, 2005 ‘The Development of Dependency Economics in the
Caribbean and Latin America: Review and Comparison’, Social
and Economic Studies, 22, 1, 1973 ‘Dependency Theory and its Relevance Today’, Review
of International Studies, 20, 2, 1994 ‘Dependency: A Formal Theory of Underdevelopment of a
Methodology for the Analysis of Concrete Situations of
Underdevelopment’, World Development, 6, 1, 1978
Wallerstein, I The Capitalist World Economy (Cambridge: CUP, 1979) Wallerstein, I World Systems Analysis: An Introduction (Durham, NC: Duke
University Press, 2004) Wallerstein, I The Modern World System, Volumes 14 (San Francisco:
University of California Press, 2011 – Four revised editions)
On Gramsci and NeoGramscian Thought Burnham, P ‘NeoGramscian Hegemony and International Order’, Capital
and Class, 15, 3, 1991 Cox, R Production, Power and World Order (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1987) Cox, R and Sinclair, T (eds) Approaches to World Order (Cambridge: CUP, 1996) Various
Chapters
24
Gramsci, A
Gill, S (ed)
Murphy, C
Rupert, M
Morton, A
Ayers, A J (ed)
Budd, A
Leysens, A
Shields, S et al
Selections from Prison Notebooks (London: Lawrence and
Wishart, 1971) Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations
(Cambridge: CUP, 1993) ‘Understanding IR, Understanding Gramsci’, Review of
International Studies, 24, 2, 1998 ‘(Re)Engaging Gramsci: A Response to Germain and Kenny’,
Review of International Studies, 24, 2, 1998 ‘Historicising Gramsci: Situating Ideas in and Beyond their
Context’, Review of International Political Economy, 9, 2,
2002 Gramsci, Political Economy and International Relations
Theory: Modern Princes and Naked Emperors (Basingstoke:
Palgrave, 2008) Various chapters Robert Cox and NeoGramscian International Relations
Theory: A Critical Appraisal (London: Routledge, 2012) The Critical Theory of Robert W Cox: Fugitive or Guru?
(Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2008) Critical International Political Economy: Dialogue, Debate and Dissensus (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2011)
Gramsci, A Selections from Prison Notebooks (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1971)
Gill, S (ed) Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations (Cambridge: CUP, 1993)
Murphy, C ‘Understanding IR, Understanding Gramsci’, Review of
International Studies, 24, 2, 1998
Rupert, M ‘(Re)Engaging Gramsci: A Response to Germain and Kenny’, Review of International Studies, 24, 2, 1998
Morton, A ‘Historicising Gramsci: Situating Ideas in and Beyond their Context’, Review of International Political Economy, 9, 2, 2002
Ayers, A J (ed) Gramsci, Political Economy and International Relations
Theory: Modern Princes and Naked Emperors (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2008) Various chapters
Budd, A Robert Cox and NeoGramscian International Relations Theory:
A Critical Appraisal (London: Routledge, 2012) Leysens, A The Critical Theory of Robert W Cox: Fugitive or Guru?
(Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2008) Shields, S et al Critical International Political Economy: Dialogue, Debate and
Dissensus (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2011)
Topic 10 – Whither Critical Theory?: The Case of Feminist IR Theory Key Questions to think about when reading: What, if anything, is “critical” about critical theory? Which different bodies of thought can be placed in the critical theory camp? How does it differ to
positivist, or “problemsolving” theory? is this a problem? Is critical theory just about unquestioned answers, rather than unanswered questions? Or, to put it another way, is critical theory hindered by
its weak scientific method and lack of a positivist ontology? What generally distinguishes feminist theories of IR? How can we draw parallels to critical theory, in particular, the latter’s pushback on “problemsolving” theory? *Cox, R ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond
International Relations Theory’, Millennium: Journal of Interna-
tional Studies, 10, 2, 1981
*Ashley, R ‘The Eye of Power: The Politics of World Modelling’,
International Organization, 37, 3, 1983 *Carver, T ‘Men in the Feminist Gaze: What does this mean in IR?’
Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 37, 1, 2008
25
*Ferguson, Y H and Mansbach, R W
*Hoffmann, M
*Hobson, J M
*Kurki, M
*Peterson, V S
*Tickner, J A
*VARIOUS
Lapid, Y
Holsti, K J
‘Between Celebration and Despair: Constructive Suggestions
for Future International Theory’, International Studies
Quarterly, 35, 4, 1991 ‘Critical Theory and the interparadigm Debate’, Millennium:
Journal of International Studies, 16, 2, 1987 ‘Is Critical Theory Always for the White West and For Western
Imperialism? Beyond Westphilian towards a postracist
Critical IR’, Review of International Studies, 33, Special Issue
on Critical IR Theory, 2007 ‘The Limitations of the Critical Edge: Reflections on Critical
and Philosophical IR Scholarship Today’, Millennium: Journal
of International Studies, 40, 1, 2011 ‘Feminist Theories within, Invisible to, and Beyond IR’, Brown
Journal of World Affairs, 10, 2, 2004 ‘You Just Don’t Understand: The Troubled Engagement
between Feminists and IR Theorists’, International Studies
Quarterly, 41, 4, 1997 Special issue of Review of International Studies on Critical
Theory in IR, 33, Supp. Special Issue 1, 2007, with articles by
Rengger and ThirkellWhite, Kratochwil, Hutchings, Palan,
Hobson, Murphy, Linklater and Devetak. ‘The Third Debate: on the Prospects of International Theory
in a postPositivist Era’, International Studies Quarterly, 33, 3,
1989 ‘Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, which are the Fairest Theories of all?’ International Studies Quarterly, 33, 3, 1989
Biersteker, T ‘Critical Reflections on postPositivism in International Relations’, International Studies Quarterly, 33, 3, 1989 George, G ‘International Relations and the search for Thinking Space: Ano-
ther view of the Third Debate’, International Studies Quarterly, 33, 3, 1989
Ruggie, J G ‘Territoriality and Beyond: Problematizing Modernity in Interna-
tional Relations’, International Organization, 47, 1, 1993
26
On Feminist Approaches Specifically... Enloe, C
ParkKang, S
Parpart, J L and M Zalewski (eds)
Peterson, V S
Peterson, V S and Runyan, A S
Robinson, F
Steans, J
Steans, J
VARIOUS
Waylen, G
Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics (San Francisco: University of California
Press, 2001 – 2nd Edition) ‘Utmost Listening: Feminist IR as a Foreign Language’,
Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 39, 3, 2011 Rethinking the “Man” Question: Sex, Gender and Violence in
International Relations (London: Zed Books, 2008) ‘How the (Meaning of) Gender Matters in Political Economy’,
New Political Economy, 10, 4, 2005 Global Gender Issues in the New Millennium (Boulder, CO:
Westview Press, 2009 – 3rd Edition)
‘Stop Talking and Listen: Discourse Ethics and Feminist Care
Ethics in International Political Theory’, Millennium: Journal
of International Studies, 39, 3, 2011 ‘Engaging from the Margins: Feminist Encounter with the
“Mainstream” of International Relations’, British Journal of
Politics and International Relations, 5, 3, 2003 Gender and International Relations: An Introduction (Oxford:
Polity, 2006 – 2nd Edition)
Roundtable discussion: ‘Reflections on the Past, Prospects for
the Future in Gender and International Relations’,
Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 37, 1, 2008 ‘You still don’t understand: why troubled engagements continue between feminists and (critical) IPE’, Review of
International Studies, 32, 1, 2006
Topic 11 – Global International Relations in the Making
IR has come under increasing and sustained scrutiny for its, inter alia, Western-centric/Eurocentric
outlook, including for the nature of its mainstream historicizing, intellectual traditions and debates. For
critics, the discipline has locked-in a ‘circumscribed view’, not least with regard to how “international” its
study really is, or how “encompassing” it really is. A diverse community of scholars has long pushed back
on the “mainstream,” and the advent of ‘Global IR’ could be a turning point. Key Questions to think
about when reading: Does (Western) IR perpetuate certain civilizational, gendered, racial and other
dominant narratives? What are the implications for multi-pronged (including Global South) perspectives
in the discipline? Against this backdrop, what is the promise of ‘Global IR’? What are its limitations?
27
*Acharya, A ‘Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds: A New
Agenda for International Studies’, International Studies Quarterly,
58, 4, 2014
*Hurrell, A ‘Towards the Global Study of International Relations’, Revista
Brasileira de Política Internacional, 59, 2, 2016
*Snidal, D and Wendt, A ‘Why There is International Theory Now," International Theory,
1, 1, 2009
*Seth, S ‘Postcolonial Theory and International Relations’, Millennium:
Journal of International Studies, 40, 1, 2011
Acharya, A and Buzan, B The Making of Global International Relations: Origins and
Evolution of IR at its Centenary (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2019)
Seth, S (ed.) Postcolonial Theory and International Relations: A Critical
Introduction (London: Routledge, 2012)
Thomas C and Wilkin P. ‘Still Waiting after all these Years: The ‘Third World’ on the Periphery of International Relations’, British Journal of International Political Relations, 6, 2, 2004
Chowdhry G and Ling L H M ‘Race(ing) International Relations: A Critical Overview of Post-Colo-nial Feminism in International Relations’, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies, March 2010. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.413
Shilliam R. (ed.) International Relations and Non-Western Thought. Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity (London: Routledge, 2011)
Kristensen P M ‘Discipline Admonished: On International Relations Fragmentation and the Disciplinary Politics of Stocktaking’, European Journal of International Relations, 22, 2, 2016
Tickner J A ‘Dealing with Difference: Problems and Possibilities for Dialogue in International Relations’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 39, 3, 2011