Moral authority and status in International Relations: Good states and the social dimension of status seeking
We develop scholarship on status in international politics by focusing on the social dimension of small and middle power status politics. This vantage opens a new window on the widely-discussed strategies social actors may use to maintain and enhance their status, showing how social creativity, mobility, and competition can all be system-supporting under some conditions. We extract lessons for other thorny issues in status research, notably questions concerning when, if ever, status is a good in itself; whether it must be a positional good; and how states measure it.
Networks of Practice at the Margins of Empire
Dr Jeppe Mulich visits NUPI to present his ongoing research on empires and privateering in the Greater Caribbean.
Empires, Privateering and the sea (EMPRISE)
EMPRISE studies the role of the importance of power at sea for the formation of empires and states from 1500-1856....
Political change and historical analogies
This article deals with how scholars, policy analysts and activists, striving to make sense of current political change, have turned to history for analogies and ideas for action. While it is encouraging to see the Trump presidency and other instances of upheaval leading to a strengthened interest in history, in academe and public life more generally, there nevertheless is a need to caution against facile appropriations of the historical record and the use of superficial similarity to legitimize political action. I discuss ways of historicizing the present, through some examples of historical analogies applied to the first months of the Trump presidency and other relatively current instances of change. I start with a discussion of historical analogies and concepts, stressing how they can be understood as both first order and second order constructs. Then I discuss the current usage of historical analogies and concepts as both first order and second order constructs, before I conclude.
History
This handbook presents in a comprehensive, concise and accessible overview, the emerging field of international political sociology. It summarizes and synthesizes existing knowledge in the field while presenting central themes and methodologies that have been at the centre of its development, providing the reader with a sense of the diversity and research dynamics that are at the heart of international political sociology as a field of study. A wide range of topics covered include: International political sociology and its cognate disciplines and fields of study; Key themes including security, mobility, finance, development, gender, religion, health, global elites and the environment; Methodologies on how to engage with international political sociology including fieldwork, archives, discourse, ethnography, assemblage, materiality, social spaces and visuality; Current and future challenges of international political sociology addressed by three key scholars. Providing a synthetic reference point, summarizing key achievements and engagements while putting forward future developments and potential fruitful lines of inquiry, it is an invaluable resource for students, academics and researchers from a range of disciplines, particularly international relations, political science, sociology, political geography, international law, international political economy, security studies and gender studies.
Beastly Diplomacy
Even if beastly iconography has been pervasive in international politics, the study of diplomacy has traditionally focused solely on man as a political animal. Animals in diplomacy have been treated as a curiosity. This article stakes a claim for a more serious engagement with beastly diplomacy, arguing that animals matter through their ontic status; by representing states; as diplomatic subjects; and as objects of diplomacy. The article places particular emphasis on how animals are a special kind of diplomatic gift, with a variety of meanings and functions. Taking animals seriously implies a rethinking of both the process and the outcomes of diplomacy.
A conceptual history of diplomacy
Scholars of diplomacy have identified diplomatic practices across the human experience, spanning the globe and going back before recorded history. Even so, the actual term ‘diplomacy’ did not enter into usage until the last decade of the 18th century. Does this discrepancy matter, and if so, what can it tell us? These are the underlying questions of this chapter. Drawing on a relatively modest secondary literature, as well as a number of primary sources, Leira emphasises the relative modernity of the concept of ‘diplomacy’, and how it emerged very rapidly as part of a much wider transformation of political vocabularies around 1800. Furthermore, he stresses, how it emerged as a contested concept (almost a term of abuse), and how it has repeatedly been contested over the last two centuries.
Kvinner i diplomati og internasjonal politikk
(Available in Norwegian only): Hvor er kvinnene? Dette spørsmålet har vært et av utgangspunktene for flere tiår med kvinnestudier i humaniora og samfunnsfag, etter hvert kjønnsstudier, der det slående ofte har vist seg at kvinnene har vært til stede hele tiden, det har bare ikke vært noen (menn) som har brydd seg om å lete etter dem. Innenfor diplomatistudier er de bøkene som vurderes her blant de første som reiser spørsmålet på systematisk vis. I denne bokanmeldelsen tar Halvard Leira for seg Glenda Sluga og Carolyn James' "Women, Diplomacy and International Politics since 1500".
Rita Augestad Knudsen
Rita Augestad Knudsen is a Senior Researcher at NUPI’s research group for Security and Defence. She currently works especially on counterterrorism...
CONSTRUCTION TIME AGAIN: HISTORY IN CONSTRUCTIVIST IR SCHOLARSHIP
In this article we seek to understand how succeeding generations of constructivists have invoked history to exact narratives of change within IR. We make the case that there is a move from a rst generation where history served primarily to undermine generalised and ahistorical mainstream arguments through a second generation where history was providing data to undercut speci c mainstream stories, replacing them with their own largely progressive stories, to a third generation where history is embraced for its own purpose, where history is seen as more open-ended and contingent. This has been a move from the general to the particular and from a meta-critique of the mainstream through accommodation with the mainstream, to a more localised opposition against the mainstream.