CIAO DATE: 2/08
This article suggests that it is by exploring the work of George Liska, the once influential yet today almost forgotten realist scholar, that we can find answers to the question of the compatibility between classical realism and its purported neoclassical offspring. Firstly, although Liska is not widely read today and his recent books are only rarely cited, the evolution of his work reveals that the tension between normativity and politics is an inseparable part of classical realist thinking. Secondly, even though he started from a purely historicist version of realism, as demonstrated in his treatment of empire and international order, Liska came to be one of the first realist scholars to try to develop a theory combining historicism and a structural approach to international relations. To those general reasons one may add a particular third one, specifically interesting for Journal of International Relations and Development. Even though Liska spent most of his scholarly career in the United States, he belonged to the group of migrs from Central Europe (in his case from Czechoslovakia); and this heritage leaves a special mark on all his works dedicated to the Soviet Union, and Eastern and Central Europe. His work is thus an interesting testimony to the rise and fall of realist hegemony over the field of international relations; hence, ironically reinforcing Liska's own notion of the historical contingency of all human cognition.
In the post-Cold War era, a voluminous literature has developed to define failed states, identify the causes and parameters of failure, and devise ways for dealing with the problems associated with state fragility and failure. While there is some theoretical diversity within this literature notably between neoliberal institutionalists and neo-Weberian institutionalists state failure is commonly defined in terms of state capacity. Since capacity is conceived in technical and 'objective' terms, the political nature of projects of state construction (and reconstruction) is masked. Whereas the existence of social and political struggles of various types is often recognized by the failed states literature, these conflicts are abstracted from political and social institutions. Such an analysis then extends into programmes that attempt to build state capacity as part of projects that seek to manage social and political conflict. Ascertaining which interests are involved and which interests are left out in such processes is essential for any understanding of the prospects or otherwise of conflict resolution.
This article investigates how the notion of Eastness informs the discourse of European Union (EU) enlargement. Eastness here refers to an inscription of identity a process by which places, events and societal developments are endowed with a likeness to the 'East' as distinct from 'Europe'. Drawing examples from academic scholarship on EU enlargement, the article outlines how the inscription of Eastness functions in the enlargement discourse, and how its functions have changed since the end of the Cold War. I argue that the erstwhile East (of Europe) as a territorially defined periphery of Europe has been layered into multiple peripheries with varying degrees of Eastness. One might say that parts of the former East have become less East-like and more Europe-like, while others are still endowed with a high degree of Eastness. At the same time, European identity is still constructed in terms of the East. Economic, political and social developments in East-Central Europe are still conceived in terms of proximity to, or distance from, an idealized Europe or Europeanness. The situation is neither one of a static and monolithic othering nor of the dissolution of Eastness. The East is best understood not as a location but as a tendency, one always inscribed in degrees, shades and flavours. The challenge is not to unearth a core meaning or location of the East, but the specific and often unremarkable processes by which Eastness is inscribed onto places.
This study tests a long-held claim about the role of a country's international practice in the shaping of its International Relations (IR) studies, using the cases of Japan, China, and Korea. The study finds sufficient evidence for a close link, but also interesting variations across the countries, different historical periods as well as different types of IR research and publications. The practicediscipline link is crucial for a fuller understanding of the structure and evolution of the IR discipline and requires systematic empirical investigation, particularly with cases beyond the core national IR countries. Assessing the precise nature of the practicediscipline link, this study adds value to existing research on national IR studies that have so far focused primarily on the impact of the American IR theories and debates and, more recently, on the domestic cultural-institutional context.
Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD, 2004, 2nd edition, 672pp.
ISBN: 0-7425-2821-9
Walter C Clemens Jr.
Pluto Press, London and Ann Arbor, MI, 2005, 211pp.
ISBN: 0745324495
Ray Kiely
Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006, 293pp.
ISBN: 0-19-929221-3
Jan Zielonka
Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills and New York, 2006, 210pp.
ISBN-13: 978-1-4039-9689-3
Sergei Prozorov
Routledge,London, 2006, 259pp.
ISBN: 0-415-33575-2
Lene Hansen