Suchergebnisse

S'il a été de bon ton, en théorie des relations internationales, de qualifier Morgenthau de traditionnaliste et de considérer les Snyder, Easton, Kaplan et d'autres comme l'avant-garde, le présent essai soutient au contraire que les principales « innovations » théoriques ont été introduites par Morgenthau et que les théories globales ultérieures – les traités qui prétendent à expliquer la totalité du domaine – n'ont d'autre originalité que d'avoir poursuivi ou développé les perceptions du maître. Tous les « globalistes » ont affirmé ou assumé (1) que le but de l'effort théorique est de permettre la généralisation, (2) que les relations interétatiques obéissent pour l'essentiel à des modèles et à des cycles, (3) que l'objet de ce secteur d'études est constitué par les bases du comportement étatique et par les schèmes de relations qui en résultent, et que (4) le monde est composé d'états-nations souverains et indépendants constituant des unités d'action sur lesquelles la recherche doit être centrée.Centrales chez Morgenthau, ces idées ont été, pour le secteur, le paradigme directeur du dernier quart de siècle. Les travaux behavioristes des globalistes ont introduit plus de précision et de rigueur dans l'analyse sans cependant changer ou remettre le paradigme en question.Les travaux de la dernière décennie, relatifs aux relations internationales, affichent une nette désaffection à l'endroit de la théorie générale. Les chercheurs ont abandonné l'idée qu'un système conceptuel unique puisse expliquer, de façon satisfaisante et avec quelque raffinement, même les grands thèmes du secteur. L'activité théorisante se concentre de plus en plus sur l'identification des variables et sur des phénomènes limités. L'auteur offre un certain nombre d'explications à la défaveur que connaît la théorie globale et termine son essai par la discussion de quelques problèmes posés par les études faisant appel aux méthodes empiriques plutôt qu'à des schèmes théoriques d'ensemble.

"China's Challenges and International Order Transition introduces an integrated conceptual framework of "international order" categorized by three levels (power, rules, and norms) and three issue-areas (security, political, and economic). Each contributor engages one or more of these nine analytical dimensions of international order to examine two questions: (1) Has China already challenged this dimension of international order? (2) How will China challenge this dimension of international order in the future? The contested views and perspectives in this volume suggest it is too simple or naive to assume an inevitable conflict between China and the outside world during a potential order transition into the future. With different strategies to challenge or reform different dimensions of international order, China's role is not a one-way street. Instead, it is an interactive process in which the world may change China as much as China may change the world. The multidimensionality of international order technically enhances the durability and sustainability of the current international order against a rapid or radical transition into the future. The aim of the book is to broaden the debate beyond the "Thucydides Trap" perspective currently popular in the West. Rather than offering a single argument, this volume offers a platform for scholars, especially Chinese scholars vs. Western scholars, to exchange and debate their different views and perspectives on China and the potential transition of international order"--

'This paper is divided into three parts. The first section is mainly descriptive; its goal is to provide a general overview of the main economic, demographic, and political trends in Tsalka district from the late Soviet period until the present day. The second section is more analytical; it analyses the real and potential arenas of conflict in the district, namely conflicts between communities and conflicts between communities and the state. It also looks at the impact of international organisations on the conflict dynamic by focusing first on the construction of the BTC pipeline by a consortium led by BP (British Petroleum) and then on the initiative of the Greek government to reduce conflict by supporting local law enforcement bodies and helping to regulate migration. The third and final part will summarise the main causes of conflict in Tsalka district and will provide recommendations for the Georgian government and for the international donor community.' (author's abstract)

The policy brief is dedicated to the theorization of current international relations in the post-Soviet area.1 The author comes to the conclusion that international order in the region can be characterized as a "Non-hegemonic cooperation" model, developed by the American political scientist Robert Keohane. The model refers to a system which does not need to be maintained by any hegemon. Instead of being controlled by only one actor, it is regulated by a framework of institutions and cooperation regimes. This model is the best characterization of the region, as currently there is no hegemon in the area able to control its international order. Instead of this, there are five important regime-making actors in the region that create the rules of cooperation. The author finds that the situation of the "Non-hegemonic cooperation" is convenient to all former Soviet states because it is in line with their foreign policy priorities, and further maintenance of this system is beneficial for all members.

Frank Vibert examines the fundamental issues involved in attempts to rethink international institutions and their rule making procedures. He analyses the basic problems with the existing system and the main approaches to its reform. The book repudiates the idea that there are any simple institutional 'fixes' for current problems, such as relying on the G20 to coordinate global rule making, and also rejects more ambitious attempts to prescribe new general organising principles for world governance. It calls instead for specific remedies for specific problems. The author recommends new procedure