Search

Begin New Search

35381. Explaining the evolution of contestation in South Asia

Publication Date:
02-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>Indias claims for regional hegemony have regularly been contested since its independence in 1947. The self-proclaimed emerging power is locked in an enduring rivalry with the South Asian secondary power, Pakistan. This article outlines the evolution of Pakistans contestation since independence and seeks to demonstrate how, when and why Pakistan adapted its foreign policy toward India. While the goals of Pakistans contestation remained constant, its means varied at two points in post-independence history. From 1947 to 1971, territorial disputes combined with a nascent nationalism drove the secondary powers foreign policy elite to engage in war and open resistance, and the divergent domestic political ideologies of both countries complicated conflict resolution. With Pakistans devastating war defeat in 1971, direct means of contestation were no longer an immediate option, and a period of reluctant acquiescence ensued. The alleged involvement of Pakistani intelligence proxies in a crisis in Jammu and Kashmir in 1987 marked the beginning of a renewed phase of resistance, though now through indirect means of nuclear coercion and subconventional warfare. This form of contestation has increasingly manifested itself in bilateral crises with high potential of escalation and primarily targeted symbols of Indias South Asian hegemony, including its political and commercial centres in Delhi and Mumbai in 2001 and 2008 respectively or Indias diplomatic representations in Afghanistan. The article concludes that the current conditions of regional contestation in South Asia, most importantly the persistent revisionist versus status-quo domestic agendas, the presence of growing nuclear arsenals, and multi-tiered Asian rivalry constellations, undermine prospects for conflict resolution and complicate modelling future strategic behaviour in the region./p

35382. South Africa's symbolic hegemony in Africa

Publication Date:
02-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>South Africas position on the African continent is widely seen to be one of dominance and leadership. No longer subject to the international opprobrium, post-apartheid South Africa launched a visionary campaign built around the notion of an African Renaissance to restructure continental institutions in line with its interests. This state-led effort was complemented by an aggressive commercial expansion by well-financed South African corporations to break into previously inaccessible markets across the continent. This populist depiction of South Africa is largely echoed in the scholarly literature on South African foreign policy towards Africa. But careful analysis of the South African foreign policy experience both in Africa and more broadly, suggests that these images are only partially realised at best and that they ignore a host of structural problems and outcomes. In particular, the case for South African hegemonic dominance over the continent is challenged by its material weakness and uneven record of foreign policy successes. Despite this, Pretoria is continually rewarded with leadership positions in international groupings, such as BRICS, G20 and nearly consecutive terms on the UN Security Council. We argue that this constitutes symbolic representivity and poses a continuing set of foreign policy dilemmas for South Africa and an international community as South Africa struggles to fulfil its hegemonic role in Africa./p

35383. African agency? Africa, South Africa and the BRICS

Publication Date:
02-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>African states, economies and societies are increasingly ambivalent about Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (the BRICS), especially their latest, fifth member, South Africa, as economic growth comes with costs, shorter- and longer-term, from social to ecological. Emerging economies, powers and societies may claim to be developmental but they still confront challenges of governance, especially of their non-renewable natural resources. Symbolic of the price of growth is continuing migration into South Africa, uneven scores on a range of indicators African Capacity Building Indicators (ACBI), Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), Human Development Index (HDI), Fragile States, Ibrahim Index and so on and the West African Commission on Drugs (WACD). The African Mining Vision (AMV) remains problematic despite or because of the BRICS./p

35384. Parallels, prescience and the past: Analogical reasoning and contemporary international politics

Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>Analogical reasoning has held a perpetual appeal to policymakers who have often drafted in historical metaphor as a mode of informing decision making. However, this article contends that since the beginning of the War on Terror, we have arguably seen the rise of a more potent form of analogy, namely ones that are selected because they fulfil an ideological function. Analogical reasoning as a tool of rational decision making has increasingly become replaced by analogical reasoning as a tool of trenchant ideologically informed policy justification. This article addresses three key areas that map out the importance of analogical reasoning to an understanding of developments in contemporary international politics: the relationship between history and politics, in intellectual and policy terms; a critical assessment of the appeal that analogical reasoning holds for policymakers; and the development of a rationale for a more effective use of history in international public policy making./p

35385. Knowledge without power: International relations scholars and the US war in Iraq

Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>In this article we present several important first steps toward understanding the role of academics in shaping US foreign policy identifying their policy views on one of the most salient foreign policy issues of this generation, the US War in Iraq; exploring how those views differ from public opinion more generally; and assessing the extent to which scholarly opinion was reflected in the public debate. To determine how IR scholars views on the invasion of Iraq differed from those of the public, we compare the answers of IR scholars at US colleges and universities to those of the US public on similar opinion survey questions. To this end, we analyze data from a unique series of surveys of IR scholars conducted by the Teaching, Research, and International Policy project./p

35386. (Ac)Counting (for) their dead: Responsiveness to Iraqi civilian casualties in the US House of Representatives

Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>While the subject of wartime civilian casualties has been recognized as an important issue in International Relations (IR), foreign policy and IR scholars have not systematically examined why and how US politicians respond to civilian deaths. This article explores the ethics of and reasons for responsiveness to Iraqi civilian deaths among politicians in the US House of Representatives from 2003 to 2008. The article argues that legislative deliberative responsiveness to civilian deaths is integral to a just debate about war. It finds evidence that partisanship, ideology and sex are associated with responsiveness to civilian deaths, and reveals stark differences in the purposes and tone of Democratic and Republican rhetoric about civilian casualties. The article provides researchers with a more thorough understanding of how and why civilian costs of war emerge within debates among US politicians, and has implications for studies on discourse ethics, congressional war politics and US foreign policy.</p>

35387. Framing the threat of catastrophic terrorism: Genealogy, discourse and President Clinton's counterterrorism approach

Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>A frequent argument in the literature on the US-led war on terror is that the war and its public discourse originated with the George W. Bush administration. This article seeks to explore the political discourse of terrorism and counterterrorism practices during the Clinton administration in order to challenge this perspective. By examining US administration discourses of terrorism, this article demonstrates deep continuities in counterterrorism approaches from Ronald Reagan to Bill Clinton, through to George W. Bush. The research suggests that, based on Reagans initial war on terrorism discourse, Clinton articulated the notion of catastrophic terrorism or new terrorism, which became a formative conception for the United States and its allies in the post-Cold War era. Clintons counterterrorism discourse then provided an important rhetorical foundation for President Bush to respond to the 2001 terrorist attacks. In other words, far from being a radical break, Bushs war on terror represents a continuation of established counter-terrorist understanding and practice./p

35388. The roots of strategic failure: The Somalia Syndrome and Al Qaeda's path to 9/11

Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>This article locates the origins of 9/11 in the increasingly globalized security context of the early post-Cold War period. In particular, it seeks to illuminate the causal connection between the disastrous US-UN humanitarian intervention in Somalia in 19921993 and the emergence of a permissive security environment that ultimately made the events of 11 September possible. It is argued here that the Somali crisis was a defining moment for US foreign policy in the post-Cold War era. It generated the Somalia Syndrome in Washington a risk-averse approach to intervention in civil conflicts which, as the terrorist attack on the United States in September 2011 subsequently revealed, had unintended but far-reaching international consequences./p

35389. Rationality, norms and identity in international relations

Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>This article examines major debates between rationalism and constructivism. It presents that there are politically significant motives of social actions, including norms and identity, which cannot be completely subsumed by the concept of instrumental rationality. These ideational or social-psychological motivations are governed primarily by thymos or affect (the moral or emotional part of the human personality) and/or value-oriented rationality. We need more flexible assumptions about main actors and their motives than those of rationalism to explain appropriately the politics of anger, loyalty and a sense of justice at international levels. However, constructivisms emphasis on ideational motivations cannot totally replace rationalism in explaining international political life. Constructivism maintains that identity or norms are causally prior to actors interests. Yet when there is conflict between pursuit of interests and maintenance of identity or norms, actors strong and well-defined self-interests can overrule their contested or unstable identity or norms. In short, causal arrows can flow in either direction between identity or norms and interests. This implies that rationalism and constructivism are complementary rather than competitive in explaining international political life./p

35390. The responsibility to protect doctrine – Coherent after all: A reply to Friberg-Fernros and Brommesson

Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Politics
Institution:
Palgrave Macmillan
Abstract:
<p>In a recent International Politics article, Henrik Friberg-Fernros and Douglas Brommesson argue that the responsibility to protect (R2P) doctrine, as it was originally introduced in the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) report, is incoherent. More specifically, they contend that there is a fundamental conflict between the implications of R2P and the six criteria the ICISS sets out to evaluate whether an intervention is justified. This article argues that these assertions are based on a misconception of how the criteria for justified intervention are interpreted in the ICISS report. Building on recent arguments from just war theory, I argue that three of these criteria do not stipulate when it is permitted to intervene, but rather what is permitted in an intervention. Subsequently, I demonstrate that in such an application, these criteria are not incompatible with the R2P.</p>