- University of Cambridge
Department of Politics and International Studies
Room 112, Alison Richard Building
Cambridge, CB3 9DT, UK
- International Relations Theory, Turkey, International Historical Sociology, Rising Powers, International political sociology, Political Science, and 32 moreRussian Politics, International Relations, Japanese politics, Political Theory, Thai politics, Turkish and Middle East Studies, Identity (Culture), Historical Sociology, Stigma, Japan, Russia, International Terrorism, Zygmunt Bauman, Erving Goffman, Norbert Elias, Ontological Security, Stigma And Shame, East West relations, Cultural Intimacy, Ontological Insecurity, Second Image Reversed, Philosophy, History, Anthropology, Political Philosophy, International Hierarchies, Sovereignty, Axial Age, Jan Assmann, Cultural Memory, Egyptology, and Ottoman Historyedit
- I am a Professor of International Relations at the University of Cambridge. For more information, visit my website: aysezarakol.comedit
For more see https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/before-the-west/78E4B5CE511AA928B2C650AF1CDFE3CA
Winner of 5 book prizes in 2023: SSHA, ISA-NE, ISA-HIST, ISA-Theory (HM), APSA Int H&P (HM)
Winner of 5 book prizes in 2023: SSHA, ISA-NE, ISA-HIST, ISA-Theory (HM), APSA Int H&P (HM)
Research Interests:
Contributors: AYŞE ZARAKOL DAVID LAKE ANDREW PHILLIPS MICHAEL BARNETT LAURA SJOBERG VINCENT POULIOT J.C. SHARMAN ALEX COOLEY SARAH STROUP AND WENDY WONG REBECCA ADLER-NISSEN... more
Contributors:
AYŞE ZARAKOL
DAVID LAKE
ANDREW PHILLIPS
MICHAEL BARNETT
LAURA SJOBERG
VINCENT POULIOT
J.C. SHARMAN
ALEX COOLEY
SARAH STROUP AND WENDY WONG
REBECCA ADLER-NISSEN
SHOGO SUZUKI
JACK DONNELLY
AYŞE ZARAKOL
DAVID LAKE
ANDREW PHILLIPS
MICHAEL BARNETT
LAURA SJOBERG
VINCENT POULIOT
J.C. SHARMAN
ALEX COOLEY
SARAH STROUP AND WENDY WONG
REBECCA ADLER-NISSEN
SHOGO SUZUKI
JACK DONNELLY
Research Interests:
Not being of the West; being behind the West; not being modern enough; not being developed or industrialized, secular, civilized, Christian, transparent, or democratic - these descriptions have all served to stigmatize certain states... more
Not being of the West; being behind the West; not being modern enough; not being developed or industrialized, secular, civilized, Christian, transparent, or democratic - these descriptions have all served to stigmatize certain states through history. Drawing on constructivism as well as the insights of social theorists and philosophers, After Defeat demonstrates that stigmatization in international relations can lead to a sense of national shame, as well as auto-Orientalism and inferior status. Ayşe Zarakol argues that stigmatized states become extra-sensitive to concerns about status, and shape their foreign policy accordingly. The theoretical argument is supported by a detailed historical overview of central examples of the established/outsider dichotomy throughout the evolution of the modern states system, and in-depth studies of Turkey after the First World War, Japan after the Second World War, and Russia after the Cold War.
Research Interests:
Türkiye, Japonya, Rusya: Coğrafi konumları, dilleri, dinleri, yüzölçümleri, güçleri, kültürleri birbirinden bu kadar farklı üç ülke neden aynı saplantılarla boğuşup durur? Bu üç ülkenin Batı denen şeye benzer tepkiler vermelerinin... more
Türkiye, Japonya, Rusya: Coğrafi konumları, dilleri, dinleri, yüzölçümleri, güçleri, kültürleri birbirinden bu kadar farklı üç ülke neden aynı saplantılarla boğuşup durur? Bu üç ülkenin Batı denen şeye benzer tepkiler vermelerinin kuramsal açıdan tutarlı bir açıklaması var mıdır? Batı tarafından mağlup edilmiş bu imparatorluklar yenilgiyle nasıl başa çıkmışlardı? Konstrüktivizmin yanı sıra toplumsal kuramcıların ve düşünürlerin görüşlerinden yararlanan Yenilgiden Sonra, lekeli devletlerin statü kaygılarına karşı aşırı duyarlı hale geldiklerini ve dış siyasetlerini buna göre biçimlendirdiklerini savunuyor. Birinci Dünya Savaşı sonrası Türkiye, İkinci Dünya Savaşı sonrası Japonya ve Soğuk Savaş sonrası Rusya vakalarını derinlemesine inceliyor, karşılaştırıyor.
Research Interests:
This paper critiques a core premise of Global IR: the association of knowledge with geography, which we term geo-epistemology. It argues that 'American' and Global IR share a Eurocentric spatial imaginary, one that was a product of... more
This paper critiques a core premise of Global IR: the association of knowledge with geography, which we term geo-epistemology. It argues that 'American' and Global IR share a Eurocentric spatial imaginary, one that was a product of Western expansion and empire. Through its geo-epistemology, Global IR enables a conservative appropriation of the critique of Eurocentrism in IR. Globality becomes a matter of assembling sufficient geographic representation rather than an analysis of the discipline's political, historical, and spatial assumptions. Anglo-American policymakers and intellectuals invented the national/international world to replace the world of empires and races that came apart in the era of the world wars. This UN world of sovereign nation-states and their regional groupings was the foundational move of both what Stanley Hoffman called 'the American social science'-IRand the American-centred world order. The paper uses the reception and legacy of Hoffman's classic essay to show how culture replaced power and history in the study of the discipline, obfuscating the Eurocentrism of Global IR.
With Tarak Barkawi and Chris Murray
With Tarak Barkawi and Chris Murray
Research Interests:
This the framing article of a symposium Global IR is an encompassing term for a range of work that has set out to globalize the discipline in terms of its core concepts, assumptions, and substantive areas of study. Our symposium supports... more
This the framing article of a symposium
Global IR is an encompassing term for a range of work that has set out to globalize the discipline in terms of its core concepts, assumptions, and substantive areas of study. Our symposium supports Global IR's goals but also offers some friendly critiques of the project with the aim of increasing its impact and durability. In this Introduction to the symposium, we posit that Global IR is vulnerable to a dynamic that limits its capacity to upend the status quo, which we term the 'essentialism trap'. Essentialism captures a range of commitments oriented around the notion that the world is constituted by pre-formed, fixed, internally coherent, and bounded social forms. The trap involves the overuse of essentialist categories by radical projects, a process that can result in the reinforcement of status quo categories and assumptions. With reference to previous openings in IR that have succumbed to this trap, we identify the dynamics that lead to this trap and suggest ways in which Global IR can avoid it by leaning more into relationalism and global history, and, thereby, fulfil the promise contained in the range of movements it speaks with and for.
with Michael Barnett
Global IR is an encompassing term for a range of work that has set out to globalize the discipline in terms of its core concepts, assumptions, and substantive areas of study. Our symposium supports Global IR's goals but also offers some friendly critiques of the project with the aim of increasing its impact and durability. In this Introduction to the symposium, we posit that Global IR is vulnerable to a dynamic that limits its capacity to upend the status quo, which we term the 'essentialism trap'. Essentialism captures a range of commitments oriented around the notion that the world is constituted by pre-formed, fixed, internally coherent, and bounded social forms. The trap involves the overuse of essentialist categories by radical projects, a process that can result in the reinforcement of status quo categories and assumptions. With reference to previous openings in IR that have succumbed to this trap, we identify the dynamics that lead to this trap and suggest ways in which Global IR can avoid it by leaning more into relationalism and global history, and, thereby, fulfil the promise contained in the range of movements it speaks with and for.
with Michael Barnett
Research Interests:
With J.C. Sharman Despite having key implications for fundamental political science questions, slavery as a global phenomenon has received little attention in the field. We argue that slavery played an important role in state-building... more
With J.C. Sharman
Despite having key implications for fundamental political science questions, slavery as a global phenomenon has received little attention in the field. We argue that slavery played an important role in state-building and international order formation. To counter a historical U.S./Atlantic bias, we draw evidence mostly from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. We identify two slave-based paths to state construction. A "slaves as the state" logic saw slave soldiers and administrators used to overcome the constraints of indirect rule in centralizing power. In a "slaves under the state" model the economy was based on slave production, itself underpinned by institutionalized state coercion. Norms often prohibited enslavement within communities, thus externalizing demand. This led to militarized slaving, and fostered increasingly long-distance trade in slaves. The combination of these normative, military, and commercial factors formed international slaving orders.
Despite having key implications for fundamental political science questions, slavery as a global phenomenon has received little attention in the field. We argue that slavery played an important role in state-building and international order formation. To counter a historical U.S./Atlantic bias, we draw evidence mostly from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. We identify two slave-based paths to state construction. A "slaves as the state" logic saw slave soldiers and administrators used to overcome the constraints of indirect rule in centralizing power. In a "slaves under the state" model the economy was based on slave production, itself underpinned by institutionalized state coercion. Norms often prohibited enslavement within communities, thus externalizing demand. This led to militarized slaving, and fostered increasingly long-distance trade in slaves. The combination of these normative, military, and commercial factors formed international slaving orders.
Research Interests:
Introduction to special issue co-edited with Christian Reus-Smit
Forum: Populist Radical Right & Illiberal Foreign Policymaking What makes current radical right populists different from other historical radical right leaders of the 20 th century? Are there more differences or similarities among... more
Forum: Populist Radical Right & Illiberal Foreign Policymaking
What makes current radical right populists different from other historical radical right leaders of the 20 th century? Are there more differences or similarities among populist radical right (PRR) in the Global South regarding how they perform foreign policy? How does the context-marked by contemporary globalization, regional interdependencies and power (geo)politicsinfluence their perceptions about their own capabilities and interests, but also about the international liberal order, its values and multilateral mechanisms? This forum addresses questions like these, offering theoretical, historical and contextual insights with concrete examples and case studies situated out of the Anglo-American spectrum. Different from traditional approaches to foreign policy analysis, the authors advance reflections about current phenomena such as illiberal foreign policymaking, anti-cosmopolitanism, religious nationalism and its transnational ties, and the re-personalization of sovereignty in the figure of the PRR. Therefore, it enriches the study of populism, radical right and foreign policymaking in IR, bringing to the debate the erosion of the liberal international order and the necessary questioning of Western-led globalization.
What makes current radical right populists different from other historical radical right leaders of the 20 th century? Are there more differences or similarities among populist radical right (PRR) in the Global South regarding how they perform foreign policy? How does the context-marked by contemporary globalization, regional interdependencies and power (geo)politicsinfluence their perceptions about their own capabilities and interests, but also about the international liberal order, its values and multilateral mechanisms? This forum addresses questions like these, offering theoretical, historical and contextual insights with concrete examples and case studies situated out of the Anglo-American spectrum. Different from traditional approaches to foreign policy analysis, the authors advance reflections about current phenomena such as illiberal foreign policymaking, anti-cosmopolitanism, religious nationalism and its transnational ties, and the re-personalization of sovereignty in the figure of the PRR. Therefore, it enriches the study of populism, radical right and foreign policymaking in IR, bringing to the debate the erosion of the liberal international order and the necessary questioning of Western-led globalization.
Research Interests:
Bu makale erken Cumhuriyet dönemi Türkiye’sini karşılaştırmalı ve küresel bir perspektifle yeniden düşünüyor. Batı veya sömürgeleri içinde yer almayan bir avuç ül- ke iki savaş arası dönemde yaptıkları tercihlerle uluslararası düzen... more
Bu makale erken Cumhuriyet dönemi Türkiye’sini karşılaştırmalı ve küresel bir perspektifle yeniden düşünüyor. Batı veya sömürgeleri içinde yer almayan bir avuç ül- ke iki savaş arası dönemde yaptıkları tercihlerle uluslararası düzen tarihinde kritik bir rol oynadılar. Bu tarihi yeniden düşünmenin sadece Türkiye tarihçiliğine değil, ulusla- rarası düzen tarihçiliğine de önemli faydaları var.
Research Interests:
If we assume the premise of this forum that we are indeed moving from a Transatlantic to an Afro-Eurasian World, it still remains to be seen what role 'Asia' will play in shaping that world. And what one imagines 'Asia' can do has much to... more
If we assume the premise of this forum that we are indeed moving from a Transatlantic to an Afro-Eurasian World, it still remains to be seen what role 'Asia' will play in shaping that world. And what one imagines 'Asia' can do has much to do with what one imagines 'Asia' to be. In this research note, I argue first that the geographical space we call Asia today does have a connected history that goes back almost a millennium (if not longer) and then also consider the reasons why that history is not invoked more in contemporary debates.
Debating Uneven and Combined Development/ Debating International Relations: A Forum This forum arises from an online event on the theory of uneven and combined development (UCD). Following an introduction which proposes a 'special... more
Debating Uneven and Combined Development/ Debating International Relations: A Forum
This forum arises from an online event on the theory of uneven and combined development (UCD). Following an introduction which proposes a
'special affinity' between UCD and International Relations (IR), four presenters at that event discuss their 'view from outside' UCD, including perspectives from Global Historical Sociology, Realism, Decolonial theory and Gramscian Marxism. Meanwhile four members of the audience add their views on UCD and disciplinarity, the need for pluralism in UCD methodology, UCD and 'whiteness', and its potential contribution to ecological theory and practice.
This forum arises from an online event on the theory of uneven and combined development (UCD). Following an introduction which proposes a
'special affinity' between UCD and International Relations (IR), four presenters at that event discuss their 'view from outside' UCD, including perspectives from Global Historical Sociology, Realism, Decolonial theory and Gramscian Marxism. Meanwhile four members of the audience add their views on UCD and disciplinarity, the need for pluralism in UCD methodology, UCD and 'whiteness', and its potential contribution to ecological theory and practice.
The Liberal International Order (LIO) is currently undermined not only by states such as Russia but also by voters in the West. We argue that both veins of discontent are driven by resentment towards the LIO's status hierarchy, rather... more
The Liberal International Order (LIO) is currently undermined not only by states such as Russia but also by voters in the West. We argue that both veins of discontent are driven by resentment towards the LIO's status hierarchy, rather than just economic grievances. Approaching discontent historically and sociologically, we show that there are two strains of recognition struggles against the LIO: one in the core of the West, driven by populist politicians and their voters, and one on the semi-periphery, fuelled by competitively authoritarian governments and their supporters. At this particular moment in history, these struggles are digitally, ideologically and organisationally interconnected in their criticism of LIO institutions, amplifying each other. The LIO is thus being hollowed out from within at a time when it is also facing some of its greatest external challenges.
Research Interests: International Relations, International Relations Theory, Identity (Culture), Populism, Recognition, and 11 morePolitics of Recognition, Social Media, History of International Relations, Authoritarianism, Russia, Status, Centre-Periphery Relations, Hierarchy, Digitalization, Semi-periphery, and Liberal international order
Part of a special issue on Ontological Security and Populism, edited by Alexandra Homolar and Brent Steele This article aims to understand the ‘non-western self’ and the different ways its ontological insecurity can manifest, through... more
Part of a special issue on Ontological Security and Populism, edited by Alexandra Homolar and Brent Steele
This article aims to understand the ‘non-western self’ and the different ways its ontological insecurity can manifest, through the example of Turkey, by contrasting Kemalism’s modernising vision with Erdoğan’s current populism. We argue that the constructions of political narratives in Turkey (and by implication in other similar settings) derive from two interrelated aspects of the spatio-temporal hierarchies of (colonial) modernity: structural insecurity and temporal insecurity. Modern Turkey’s ontological insecurity was constructed spatially on the one hand, as liminality and structural in-betweenness, and temporally on the other, as lagging behind the modernisation of the West. After discussing how Kemalism offered to deal with such insecurities in the twentieth century, we then analyse the AKP period of the twenty-first century as an alternative attempted answer to these problems and explain why efforts to dismantle the Kemalist framework collapsed into its populist mirror image. The example of the Turkish case underlines the importance of focusing on the different ways in which the structural and temporal insecurities of ‘the non-western self’ take shape given point and manner of entry into the modern international order.
This article aims to understand the ‘non-western self’ and the different ways its ontological insecurity can manifest, through the example of Turkey, by contrasting Kemalism’s modernising vision with Erdoğan’s current populism. We argue that the constructions of political narratives in Turkey (and by implication in other similar settings) derive from two interrelated aspects of the spatio-temporal hierarchies of (colonial) modernity: structural insecurity and temporal insecurity. Modern Turkey’s ontological insecurity was constructed spatially on the one hand, as liminality and structural in-betweenness, and temporally on the other, as lagging behind the modernisation of the West. After discussing how Kemalism offered to deal with such insecurities in the twentieth century, we then analyse the AKP period of the twenty-first century as an alternative attempted answer to these problems and explain why efforts to dismantle the Kemalist framework collapsed into its populist mirror image. The example of the Turkish case underlines the importance of focusing on the different ways in which the structural and temporal insecurities of ‘the non-western self’ take shape given point and manner of entry into the modern international order.
Research Interests:
The past decade has been characterised (among other things) by the emergence of a discourse about the 'Rise of the Rest'. (Some) non-Western states have been described as 'rising powers' capable of agency in the international system and... more
The past decade has been characterised (among other things) by the emergence of a discourse about the 'Rise of the Rest'. (Some) non-Western states have been described as 'rising powers' capable of agency in the international system and as potential partners for the West in global governance. This stands in contrast to a more traditional narrative that saw the non-West primarily as a source of international problems and a developmental project. Does this discursive shift signify a historic reversal in how the non-West understood by the West? The answer is complicated. In this article, I argue that the hype about 'rising powers' in Western policy circles following the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-8 had little relation to an 'objective' analysis of actual structural shifts in favour of 'the Rest' and was more akin to a financial bubble, with speculation driving perceptions of 'rising powers.' I also show that the 'rising powers' literature is better located within the broader (and long-standing) debate about the decline of the US, and should be read more as a manifestation of American anxieties and hopes than as informing us about the choices or the motivations of the 'rising powers.' Ironically, however, the Western hype nevertheless has helped along a structural shift that is under way, first by partly moulding reality in that direction (especially in the form of financial decisions), but more importantly by freeing non-Western powers (for better or worse) from their internalised cages of perceived inferiority and lack of agency in the modern international order.
Research Interests:
This article is part of a special Issue in Review of International Studies on 'Misrecognition in World Politics', curated by Charlotte Epstein, Thomas Lindemann and Ole Jacob Sending. First, I argue that contrary what was often assumed in... more
This article is part of a special Issue in Review of International Studies on 'Misrecognition in World Politics', curated by Charlotte Epstein, Thomas Lindemann and Ole Jacob Sending. First, I argue that contrary what was often assumed in the recognition literature, social hierarchies (as in the Hegelian master-slave dynamic) are very stable. Though social hierarchies are relationships of misrecognition, they nevertheless allow for the simulation of recognition for 'the master', and also trap 'the slave' in that role through stigmatisation. Second, I make a historical argument about the state and its role in recognition struggles. The modern state is relatively unique (historically speaking) in being tasked with solving the recognition problems of its citizens. At the same time, the modern state has to derive its own sovereignty from the recognition of those same citizens. There is an inherent tension between these two facts, which forces the modern state to turn increasingly outward for its own recognition. This is why 'the master-slave dynamic' was increasingly projected onto the international stage from nineteenth century onwards (along with the diffusion of the modern state model). As a result, international recognition came to play an even larger role in state sovereignty than domestic recognition (in contrast to common historical practice). This also explains how and why social hierarchies came to dominate international politics around the same time as the norm of sovereign equality.
Research Interests:
Forum - In the Beginning there was No Word (for It): Terms, Concepts, and Early Sovereignty [edited by Julia Costa Lopez] The idea that the concept of sovereignty emerged (first and exclusively) in Europe is so ingrained that most... more
Forum - In the Beginning there was No Word (for It): Terms, Concepts, and Early Sovereignty [edited by Julia Costa Lopez]
The idea that the concept of sovereignty emerged (first and exclusively) in Europe is so ingrained that most scholarship dealing with this issue does not even specify that its arguments are derived from European materials only. This is not to say that the sovereignty literature makes any explicit claims about the emergence of sovereignty outside of Europe (or even lack thereof); it is disinterestedly silent about other regions. This silence is then inevitably filled in the reader’s imagination with the usual assumption of the non-West temporally lagging behind the West on this issue as well. To their immense credit, organisers of this forum have not rested on such a problematic trope and have tasked me with discussing “sovereignty outside of the West”. I will therefore focus on the broad issue of how thinking comparatively and beyond the West can radically change our thinking about modern sovereignty.
The idea that the concept of sovereignty emerged (first and exclusively) in Europe is so ingrained that most scholarship dealing with this issue does not even specify that its arguments are derived from European materials only. This is not to say that the sovereignty literature makes any explicit claims about the emergence of sovereignty outside of Europe (or even lack thereof); it is disinterestedly silent about other regions. This silence is then inevitably filled in the reader’s imagination with the usual assumption of the non-West temporally lagging behind the West on this issue as well. To their immense credit, organisers of this forum have not rested on such a problematic trope and have tasked me with discussing “sovereignty outside of the West”. I will therefore focus on the broad issue of how thinking comparatively and beyond the West can radically change our thinking about modern sovereignty.
Research Interests:
By Janice Bially Mattern and Ayşe Zarakol Hierarchy-centered approaches to IR promise to deliver what anarchy-centered approaches have not: a framework for theorizing and empirically analyzing world politics as a global system rather... more
By Janice Bially Mattern and Ayşe Zarakol
Hierarchy-centered approaches to IR promise to deliver what anarchy-centered approaches have not: a framework for theorizing and empirically analyzing world politics as a global system rather than just an international one. At the core of this proposition are three features of hierarchical systems as they are represented across the growing IR literature on the topic. First, the structures of differentiation at the core of hierarchical systems are deeply implicated with power. Hierarchical systems are thus intrinsically political. Second, in world politics, hierarchies stratify, rank, and organize the relations not only among states but also other kinds of actors as well, and often even a mix of different actors within a single structure of differentiation. Third, there are many different kinds of hierarchical relations in world politics, each of which generate different “logics” influencing social, moral, and behavioral outcomes. Hierarchy has been understood in the IR literature in two ways: narrowly, as a relationship of legitimate authority; and broadly, as intersubjective manifestations of organized inequality. Hierarchy operates in a variety of different ways that range from ordering solutions to deep structures. We identify three such “logics” that have been fruitfully explored in IR scholarship and that can form the basis of a future research agenda: hierarchy as an institutionalized functional bargain between actors (a logic of trade-offs); hierarchy as differentiated social and political roles shaping behavior (a logic of positionality); and hierarchy as a productive political space or structure (a logic of productivity).
Hierarchy-centered approaches to IR promise to deliver what anarchy-centered approaches have not: a framework for theorizing and empirically analyzing world politics as a global system rather than just an international one. At the core of this proposition are three features of hierarchical systems as they are represented across the growing IR literature on the topic. First, the structures of differentiation at the core of hierarchical systems are deeply implicated with power. Hierarchical systems are thus intrinsically political. Second, in world politics, hierarchies stratify, rank, and organize the relations not only among states but also other kinds of actors as well, and often even a mix of different actors within a single structure of differentiation. Third, there are many different kinds of hierarchical relations in world politics, each of which generate different “logics” influencing social, moral, and behavioral outcomes. Hierarchy has been understood in the IR literature in two ways: narrowly, as a relationship of legitimate authority; and broadly, as intersubjective manifestations of organized inequality. Hierarchy operates in a variety of different ways that range from ordering solutions to deep structures. We identify three such “logics” that have been fruitfully explored in IR scholarship and that can form the basis of a future research agenda: hierarchy as an institutionalized functional bargain between actors (a logic of trade-offs); hierarchy as differentiated social and political roles shaping behavior (a logic of positionality); and hierarchy as a productive political space or structure (a logic of productivity).
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Contrary to what is often assumed, norm-internalisation does not always lead to compliance. Normative judgements may be simultaneously internalised and outwardly rejected. Non-compliance is at times a result of hyper-awareness of the... more
Contrary to what is often assumed, norm-internalisation does not always lead to compliance. Normative judgements may be simultaneously internalised and outwardly rejected. Non-compliance is at times a result of hyper-awareness of the particular origin of norms, rather than an unwillingness of the would-be-recipients to do ‘good’ deeds, or their inability to understand what is ‘good’. Such is often the case for non-Western states, as I demonstrate in this article by utilising the sociological concepts of stigma and stigmatisation. In its inability to acknowledge this dynamic, which has its roots in the colonial past of the international order, the constructivist model of norm-diffusion commits two errors. On the one hand, it falls short as a causal explanation, conflating internalisation with socialisation, and socialisation with compliance. On the other hand, it reproduces existing hierarchies in the international system, treating only non-compliance as endogenously driven, but compliance as a result of external stimuli. As there is a great deal of correlation between non-compliance and political geography, such a depiction, coupled with the fact that most norms under scrutiny are ‘good’ norms, once again casts non-Western states as having agency only when they commit ‘bad’ deeds.
This article draws attention to some surprising similarities between the recent political trajectories of Turkey and Thailand in order to argue that international norms strongly shape domestic cleavage formations. In other words, the... more
This article draws attention to some surprising similarities between the recent political trajectories of Turkey and Thailand in order to argue that international norms strongly shape domestic cleavage formations. In other words, the timing and the manner of incorporation of particular states into the international system not only affects their political and economic development, but also the way various domestic groups see their mission, their identity and their opposition. In both Turkey and Thailand, what development has brought is neither the opposition between traditional status groups and the market generated social forces, nor the tradition/religion based opposition to modernization and democracy that is typically assumed to mark developing societies. What we find in both cases instead is a modernization generated statist/bureaucratic social middle class which justifies its skepticism of democratization on the basis of norms upheld by the international society itself.
Research Interests:
In anthropology, the concept of cultural intimacy expresses those aspects of a cultural identity that are considered a source of international criticism for the state, but are nevertheless used to provide insiders with a sense of national... more
In anthropology, the concept of cultural intimacy expresses those aspects of a cultural identity that are considered a source of international criticism for the state, but are nevertheless used to provide insiders with a sense of national comfort, understanding, and self-reflexive, ontological security (Herzfeld, 2005). Cultural intimacy helps illuminate how states present themselves internationally and how they understand themselves domestically. It can also explain the seeming discrepancies and contradictions between a state’s domestic and international identities. Cultural intimacy, in other words, explains the mutual reproduction of different levels of identity. Using the concept of cultural intimacy as a departure point, this paper develops a framework for understanding incongruities in the domestic and international facades of state identity. We argue that there is a structural component to the level of discomfort caused by negative international appraisals of a given state. Structural position determines whether the domestic sources of cultural intimacy will cause shame, embarrassment or guilt, and therefore also indicate how that negative international image will be handled by the state. The theoretical argument is illustrated with reference to the cases of Serbia, Croatia, and the Netherlands, and their distinctive responses to the Balkan conflict of the 1990s.
Research Interests:
This article aims to understand the phenomenon of international terrorism by wedding a constructivist understanding of terrorism with an overview of the historical evolution of the state. The Westphalian state has replaced three types of... more
This article aims to understand the phenomenon of international terrorism by wedding a constructivist understanding of terrorism with an overview of the historical evolution of the state. The Westphalian state has replaced three types of authority: religious, personal and local. Political challenges to the modern international system inevitably derive their claim to legitimacy from one of these other forms of authority. I argue that there is a correlation between the kind of legitimacy claim a ‘terrorist’ cause is based on and how threatening we find the activities based on that claim. The less the distance between the unrecognised legitimacy claim on the one hand and the principles conferring legitimacy in the modern states system on the other, the less ontologically threatening we find the claimants to be. All historical variants of modern ‘terrorism’ fall into one of two categories of disruptive activity. They are either based in claims to local authority and target only particular states, or in claims to personal and/or religious authority and reject the modern states system altogether. Groups labelled as terrorist can therefore be classified as system-affirming or system-threatening. The former is a contained problem, but the latter has followed geographically broadening spread pattern throughout the international system.
Research Interests:
This article joins the growing scholarship on the ontological security needs of states. By focusing on state denial of historical crimes, the article will address the main point of contention among scholars who study ontological security,... more
This article joins the growing scholarship on the ontological security needs of states. By focusing on state denial of historical crimes, the article will address the main point of contention among scholars who study ontological security, i.e. the question of whether identity pressures on states are mostly endogenously or exogenously generated. Through a study of the Turkish state’s reluctance to apologize for the Armenian genocide, and the Japanese discomfort over the WWII atrocities, I argue that we can avoid tautology in our generalizations by introducing temporal and spatial dimensions to the argument. Inter-subjective pressures matter more at times when traditional routines defining the self are broken and are more likely to create ontological insecurity outside the West. The review of the Turkish and Japanese cases demonstrate that both social and individualistic approaches to ontological security are partly right, but also incomplete because neither takes into account the uneven expansion of international society or the effect this expansion has had on the identity of outsider states who were incorporated into the system at a later date.
Research Interests:
This article compares recent political developments in two seemingly different countries: Turkey and Thailand. The similarities between the trajectories of Turkey and Thailand date back to their similar manner of incorporation into the... more
This article compares recent political developments in two seemingly different countries: Turkey and Thailand. The similarities between the trajectories of Turkey and Thailand date back to their similar manner of incorporation into the modern international system in the late nineteenth century. In recent years, the rise of new societal groups based upon urbanized villagers has produced charismatic populist leaders who preach democracy, but practise electoralism. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Thaksin Shinawatra are locked in parallel confrontations with traditionally interventionist military/bureaucratic elites. A comparison between Thailand and Turkey provides insights that are generally applicable to our understanding of democratization outside the West.
Research Interests:
Given its economic success and the political transformations of the last decade, it is not surprising that Turkey is now charting an ambitious course in foreign policy. This article provides a sober assessment of some of the shortcomings... more
Given its economic success and the political transformations of the last decade, it is not surprising that Turkey is now charting an ambitious course in foreign policy. This article provides a sober assessment of some of the shortcomings becoming evident in Turkish foreign policy, and argues that if these problems are not addressed, Turkey is due to fall short of its regional leadership ambitions.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Historically, there have been high levels of inter-party mobility in the Turkish parliament. The military makers of the 1982 constitution felt that party changing not only promoted political instability and was unethical, but they also... more
Historically, there have been high levels of inter-party mobility in the Turkish parliament. The military makers of the 1982 constitution felt that party changing not only promoted political instability and was unethical, but they also feared that it might undermine the two party system they were trying to build. They introduced measures to prevent it. These failed to stop the mobility of deputies who found many ways to circumvent restrictions to move between parties. The restrictions have since been repealed. Such mobility has contributed to a peaceful transition from military to civilian rule. New parties have been formed, others have merged through party changing, while parties closed down by the constitutional court have found an opportunity to get reorganized as a parliamentary party. Inter-party mobility done for political and personal benefit, on the other hand, raises questions of political and personal ethics. Party changers and non-changers do not appear to have different attributes. Political contexts influence party changing decisions by individual deputies and factions.
Research Interests:
The chapter makes two main arguments. First, if the interwar period was marked by considerable continuities in the forms of statehood that emerged in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it was also a pivotal period in the... more
The chapter makes two main arguments. First, if the interwar period was marked by considerable continuities in the forms of statehood that emerged in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it was also a pivotal period in the emergence of core features of the state that are still with us today, particularly its association with nationalism, “modernization,” and development. Second, the interwar period saw the establishment of projects intended to accelerate the formation of the modern state outside the “core” of the international system, i.e., the area often called “the West” or “the Global North” today. This trend was especially visible in the “semi-periphery".
Research Interests:
Edited by Klaus Schlichte and Stephan Stetter
Research Interests:
This chapter shows that versions of 'modernization theory' still haunt International Relations (IR)'s understanding of 'modernity'. 'Modernization theory' posits a teleology of political development wherein Western societies lead the way... more
This chapter shows that versions of 'modernization theory' still haunt International Relations (IR)'s understanding of 'modernity'. 'Modernization theory' posits a teleology of political development wherein Western societies lead the way and others follow in their footsteps. It is an understanding that was foundational to the discipline, and despite having come under much criticism in the intervening decades, this understanding has not been rejected by IR. IR historical narratives, whether about the emergence of the modern state or the modern international system, inevitably reproduce this teleology, and critical scholarship does not really challenge it either beyond a normative critique. Metahistorical narratives of this type cannot be dismantled by micro-level critiques but have to be replaced by alternatives of a similar scale. We need to develop alternative metahistorical narratives of global modernity in which all actors share the same temporal space and have similar levels of agency. The chapter demonstrates these claims through a detailed examination of the 'emergence of the modern state' literature.
Research Interests:
This is a co-authored handbook chapter (with Gulsah Capan) on IR theory, the problem of Eurocentrism and the geopolitical hierarchies within knowledge production. For the full text see The Sage Handbook of the History, Philosophy and... more
This is a co-authored handbook chapter (with Gulsah Capan) on IR theory, the problem of Eurocentrism and the geopolitical hierarchies within knowledge production. For the full text see The Sage Handbook of the History, Philosophy and Sociology of International Relations (2018), edited by Andreas Gofas, Inanna Hamati-Ataya and Nicholas Onuf.
Research Interests:
This is a draft version of an already published chapter (pp. 193-210) from Against International Relations Norms, Charlotte Epstein, ed. (Routledge, 2017). The main argument is that the Turkish government has used postcolonial arguments... more
This is a draft version of an already published chapter (pp. 193-210) from Against International Relations Norms, Charlotte Epstein, ed. (Routledge, 2017). The main argument is that the Turkish government has used postcolonial arguments to justify its exclusionary policies that run in the opposite direction and as a way to shield itself against Western criticism. Though the Turkish political landscape has changed considerably since the time of writing (the chapter was finished before the 2016 coup attempt), we believe that the main observation still holds and is applicable to many other contexts such as Russia, India and so on. Postcolonialism is not immune to being hijacked by reactionary political ends.
I do not have permission to upload the printed chapter, but hopefully reading this draft will give those who are interested in the argument an incentive to check out and/or buy the book.
I do not have permission to upload the printed chapter, but hopefully reading this draft will give those who are interested in the argument an incentive to check out and/or buy the book.
Research Interests:
in Kuşku ile Komşuluk: Türkiye ve Rusya İlişkilerinde Değişen Dinamikler, derleyen: Gencer Özcan, Evren Balta ve Burç Beşgül. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
Research Interests:
In Giorgi Areshidze, Paul Carrese and Suzanna Sherry, eds. Constitutionalism, Executive Power, and the Spirit of Moderation: Essays in Honor of Murray Dry. SUNY Press. [This essay is based on a set of remarks I gave at a conference held... more
In Giorgi Areshidze, Paul Carrese and Suzanna Sherry, eds. Constitutionalism, Executive Power, and the Spirit of Moderation: Essays in Honor of Murray Dry. SUNY Press.
[This essay is based on a set of remarks I gave at a conference held at Middlebury College in 2010. Though it is only forthcoming now, the text was produced in 2010 as well. The conference was in honor of Professor Murray Dry, my undergraduate advisor in political science. All of the essays in the Festschrift are written by Professor Dry’s former students, who now have their own academic careers.
Professor Dry’s interests are in constitutional law and American political thought – I still remember his classes fondly but do not work on those areas. Therefore, in this essay I tried to create a conversation between my current interests (e.g. international hierarchies, east-west comparisons) and areas of research I was privileged to explore with Professor Dry as an undergraduate (e.g. constitutional reasoning, legitimation, judicial review).]
[This essay is based on a set of remarks I gave at a conference held at Middlebury College in 2010. Though it is only forthcoming now, the text was produced in 2010 as well. The conference was in honor of Professor Murray Dry, my undergraduate advisor in political science. All of the essays in the Festschrift are written by Professor Dry’s former students, who now have their own academic careers.
Professor Dry’s interests are in constitutional law and American political thought – I still remember his classes fondly but do not work on those areas. Therefore, in this essay I tried to create a conversation between my current interests (e.g. international hierarchies, east-west comparisons) and areas of research I was privileged to explore with Professor Dry as an undergraduate (e.g. constitutional reasoning, legitimation, judicial review).]
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This chapter contains sections titled: Sovereign Equality and InequalityDividing the World into ZonesSouthern Failure as Systemic FailureConclusionNotesReferencesSovereign Equality and InequalityDividing the World into ZonesSouthern... more
This chapter contains sections titled: Sovereign Equality and InequalityDividing the World into ZonesSouthern Failure as Systemic FailureConclusionNotesReferencesSovereign Equality and InequalityDividing the World into ZonesSouthern Failure as Systemic FailureConclusionNotesReferences
Research Interests:
H-Diplo | Robert Jervis International Security Studies Forum Roundtable Review 15-3 Ayşe Zarakol, Before the West: The Rise and Fall of Eastern World Orders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022. with Victoria Tin-bor Hui, Flippo... more
H-Diplo | Robert Jervis International Security Studies Forum Roundtable Review 15-3
Ayşe Zarakol, Before the West: The Rise and Fall of Eastern World Orders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022.
with Victoria Tin-bor Hui, Flippo Costa Buranelli, Ryan D. Griffiths and Jelena Subotic
Ayşe Zarakol, Before the West: The Rise and Fall of Eastern World Orders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022.
with Victoria Tin-bor Hui, Flippo Costa Buranelli, Ryan D. Griffiths and Jelena Subotic
Research Interests:
H-Diplo | Robert Jervis International Security Studies Forum
Roundtable Review 14-30
Patricia Owens and Katharina Rietzler, eds. Women’s International Thought: A New History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021
Roundtable Review 14-30
Patricia Owens and Katharina Rietzler, eds. Women’s International Thought: A New History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021
Research Interests:
This is my response to the Francesco Guicciardini Prize Forum on Before the West, with excellent contributors Victoria Hui, Halvard Leira and Andrew Phillips (+Joanne Yao)
Research Interests:
Contribution to a book forum on Orhan Pamuk and the Good of World Literature, by Gloria Fisk
A symposium on Charles R. Butcher and Ryan D. Griffiths, 'Between Eurocentrism and Babel: A Framework for the Analysis of States, State Systems, and International Orders', International Studies Quarterly 61. 2(2017): 328–336. Daniel... more
A symposium on Charles R. Butcher and Ryan D. Griffiths, 'Between Eurocentrism and Babel: A Framework for the Analysis of States, State Systems, and International Orders', International Studies Quarterly 61. 2(2017): 328–336.
Daniel Nexon
Alexander D. Barder
Ayşe Zarakol
Hendrik Spruyt
Benjamin Denison
Megan A. Stewart
Seva Gunitsky
Charles R. Butcher and Ryan D. Griffiths
Daniel Nexon
Alexander D. Barder
Ayşe Zarakol
Hendrik Spruyt
Benjamin Denison
Megan A. Stewart
Seva Gunitsky
Charles R. Butcher and Ryan D. Griffiths
Introduction by Richard Ned Lebow, King’s College London. 3 Review by Edward Keene, Christ Church, The University of Oxford. 6 Review by Jennifer Mitzen, Ohio State University. 9 Review by Ayşe Zarakol, University of Cambridge. 13... more
Introduction by Richard Ned Lebow, King’s College London. 3
Review by Edward Keene, Christ Church, The University of Oxford. 6
Review by Jennifer Mitzen, Ohio State University. 9
Review by Ayşe Zarakol, University of Cambridge. 13
Author’s Response by Barry Buzan and George Lawson, London School of Economics and Political Science. 15
Review by Edward Keene, Christ Church, The University of Oxford. 6
Review by Jennifer Mitzen, Ohio State University. 9
Review by Ayşe Zarakol, University of Cambridge. 13
Author’s Response by Barry Buzan and George Lawson, London School of Economics and Political Science. 15
Research Interests:
Essay forthcoming in PS (50.1, 2017). Symposium ('Constructivism and the US Academy') includes Brent Steele (organiser); myself; Jelena Subotic; Jarrod Hayes; Mike Struet; Nick Onuf (respondent) In this brief forum essay, I highlight... more
Essay forthcoming in PS (50.1, 2017). Symposium ('Constructivism and the US Academy') includes Brent Steele (organiser); myself; Jelena Subotic; Jarrod Hayes; Mike Struet; Nick Onuf (respondent)
In this brief forum essay, I highlight some more critical insights that emerge from the TRIP project in the hopes of generating a productive conversation about how the surveys should be understood. I do this by first drawing attention to the fact that the results from recent TRIP assessments make a prima facie case that the discipline is hierarchically organized in ways that marginalize some of the most subscribed-to paradigms and approaches. The assessments make it apparent that the discipline is sociologically stratified in ways that should at least be questioned, if not outright challenged.
In this brief forum essay, I highlight some more critical insights that emerge from the TRIP project in the hopes of generating a productive conversation about how the surveys should be understood. I do this by first drawing attention to the fact that the results from recent TRIP assessments make a prima facie case that the discipline is hierarchically organized in ways that marginalize some of the most subscribed-to paradigms and approaches. The assessments make it apparent that the discipline is sociologically stratified in ways that should at least be questioned, if not outright challenged.
My contribution to a forum on How the West Came to Rule: The Geopolitical Origins of Capitalism by Alexander Anievas and Kerem Nişancıoğlu.
Research Interests:
This is a policy memo about the developments in Turkey since the failed coup attempt of July 15, 2016, discussing parallels between the Erdogan regime that is taking shape now and that of Putin in Russia.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
[This policy memo is from 2013] Since the start of the 2000s, it has become commonplace to speak of the so-called “Rise of the Rest.” This theme skyrocketed after the global financial crisis of 2008-9, which disproportionately affected... more
[This policy memo is from 2013] Since the start of the 2000s, it has become commonplace to speak of the so-called “Rise of the Rest.” This theme skyrocketed after the global financial crisis of 2008-9, which disproportionately affected the economies of Western industrialized states. Although not everyone agrees that “the Rest” is rising to the extent that they seriously challenge Western dominance in the international system, it cannot be denied that “rising powers” now occupy a significant space in Western policy discourse about international relations and international political economy. This memo considers how the growing interest in “rising powers” has affected the perception of Russia in the United States.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
[This policy memo is from 2012] More than a year after the inception of the so-called Arab Spring, Turkey’s much-ballyhooed regional rise is teetering on the brink. Especially in its ability to influence outcomes in Syria, but also in its... more
[This policy memo is from 2012] More than a year after the inception of the so-called Arab Spring, Turkey’s much-ballyhooed regional rise is teetering on the brink. Especially in its ability to influence outcomes in Syria, but also in its reading of regional dynamics in general, Turkey finds itself consistently outmaneuvered by other regional powers like Russia and Iran with longer standing interests in the Middle East. Furthermore, the convergence between the positions of Turkey and the West on Syria, when so explicitly pitted against the Russian position (whether or not by design), recalls to mind Cold War dynamics where Turkey was hardly more than an extension of the United States in terms of its role in the region. In other words, Turkey may finally be in the big leagues, but it is also dangerously close to a strikeout.
Research Interests:
Почти полтора года спустя после начала так называемой «арабской весны» столь широко разрекламированный рост роли Турции в ближневосточном регионе выглядит отнюдь не столь впечатляющим. Это особенно бросается в глаза при наблюдении над ее... more
Почти полтора года спустя после начала так называемой «арабской весны» столь широко разрекламированный рост роли Турции в ближневосточном регионе выглядит отнюдь не столь впечатляющим. Это особенно бросается в глаза при наблюдении над ее попытками повлиять на события в Сирии, однако, даже когда речь идет о динамике в регионе в целом, Турция (по крайней мере – в краткосрочной перспективе) постоянно оказывается оттесненной на задний план другими региональными державами, имеющими более постоянные интересы на Ближнем Востоке, такими как Россия и Иран. Более того, совпадение позиций Турции и Запада в вопросе о Сирии, особенно на фоне столь очевидного противостояния России (умышленного или нет), напоминает о временах Холодной войны, когда Турция рассматривалась в регионе лишь как инструмент проведения в жизнь интересов США. Иными словами, может быть Турция, наконец, и играет в высшей лиге, однако она опасно близка к штрафной скамье. Это означает, что правительство ПСР (Партии справедливости и развития) может реально оказаться в такой ситуации, когда ей придется умерить свои региональные амбиции до уровня, соответствующего традиционной (и главным образом несущественной) роли, которую Турция играла на Ближнем Востоке в ХХ веке. Поскольку это может произойти невзирая на экономический, политический и социальный прогресс, достигнутый Турцией за последнее десятилетия, то ее провал будет гораздо более болезненным, нежели в прошлом. Это также больно ударит по США и ЕС, поскольку в ситуации, когда Турция не выглядит как самостоятельный политический игрок, доверие к ней на Ближнем Востоке полностью утрачивается, а, следовательно, она будет абсолютно непригодна для роли посредника между Западом и странами региона.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This is an excellent edited volume which makes a compelling case that "the declaration of Area Studies' death was premature" (Editor's introduction, p.1). As Milutinovic explains, Area Studies was declared to be passé for a number of... more
This is an excellent edited volume which makes a compelling case that "the declaration of Area Studies' death was premature" (Editor's introduction, p.1). As Milutinovic explains, Area Studies was declared to be passé for a number of reasons: because globalisation had unified and homogenised the world; because Area Studies were too complicit in Cold War political projects; because they lacked "a specific method and a clear and unique object" and because they were deemed incapable of theory-building (Editor's introduction, pp.1-2). As this volume shows us, these criticisms are all misplaced.
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Stigma and European Union
Research Interests:
""Decentering International Relations. By Meghana Nayak and Eric Selbin. London: Zed Books, 2010. 256 pp., $35.95 paperback (ISBN-13: 978-1-848-13238-2). International Relations Theory and Philosophy: Interpretive Dialogues. Edited... more
""Decentering International Relations. By Meghana Nayak and Eric Selbin. London: Zed Books, 2010. 256 pp., $35.95 paperback
(ISBN-13: 978-1-848-13238-2).
International Relations Theory and Philosophy: Interpretive Dialogues. Edited by Cerwyn Moore and Chris Farrands. New York: Routledge, 2010. 240 pp., $140.00 hardcover
(ISBN-13: 978-0415462266).
Scientific Realism and International Relations. Edited by Jonathan Joseph and Colin Wright. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. 288 pp., $85.00 hardcover
(ISBN-13: 978-0230240063)."
(ISBN-13: 978-1-848-13238-2).
International Relations Theory and Philosophy: Interpretive Dialogues. Edited by Cerwyn Moore and Chris Farrands. New York: Routledge, 2010. 240 pp., $140.00 hardcover
(ISBN-13: 978-0415462266).
Scientific Realism and International Relations. Edited by Jonathan Joseph and Colin Wright. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. 288 pp., $85.00 hardcover
(ISBN-13: 978-0230240063)."
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
A short piece from before the May elections, also available in most other major languages
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
On the Turkish Constitutional Referendum Results
Research Interests:
At 7.05 p.m. Turkish time yesterday, the Russian ambassador, Andrei Karlov, was shot dead in an Ankara art gallery, while visiting an exhibition entitled Russia through Turkish Eyes. The assassin, Mevlüt Mert Altıntaş, an off-duty Turkish... more
At 7.05 p.m. Turkish time yesterday, the Russian ambassador, Andrei Karlov, was shot dead in an Ankara art gallery, while visiting an exhibition entitled Russia through Turkish Eyes. The assassin, Mevlüt Mert Altıntaş, an off-duty Turkish police officer in a suit and tie, calmly shot Karlov in the back several times; spoke in Turkish about Aleppo, with his hand in the air, one finger pointed upward (a jihadi sign, symbolising ‘takbir’, the greatness and oneness of Allah); and then said, in accented Arabic, a few sentences associated with Jabhat al-Nusra. (We can be sure of all this because the shooting was captured by an Associated Press photographer.) Altıntaş was killed by security forces who stormed the building. Vladimir Putin was informed of the assassination while on his way to watch a play written by Alexander Griboyedov, Nicholas I’s ambassador to Persia, who was killed in 1829 when a mob stormed the Russian embassy in Tehran.
Research Interests:
Since the failed coup attempt on 15 July, two distinct narratives about Turkey have emerged. Talking to Turks and non-Turks about the coup increasingly resembles travelling between parallel universes.
Research Interests: Turkey and Modern Turkey
Abstract: In my dissertation, I analyze how changing international norms influenced the adjustment strategies employed by non-Western former empires after defeat. Although international relations theorists have explored the post-war grand... more
Abstract: In my dissertation, I analyze how changing international norms influenced the adjustment strategies employed by non-Western former empires after defeat. Although international relations theorists have explored the post-war grand strategies of the victorious, they have given ...
Research Interests:
T24 - Cansu Çamlıbel - Zor Konuşmalar
Interview with Cansu Çamlıbel
Interview with Cansu Çamlıbel
Research Interests:
IR scholars and Historians are increasingly in dialogue these days, trying to give meaning and substance to how we think about the international order, not least what it is. This conversation between Ayşe Zarakol (AZ), Heidi Tworek (HT),... more
IR scholars and Historians are increasingly in dialogue these days, trying to give meaning and substance to how we think about the international order, not least what it is. This conversation between Ayşe Zarakol (AZ), Heidi Tworek (HT), and Glenda Sluga (GS) engages Zarakol's British Academy 'Frontiers of Knowledge' funded grant which aims to bring IR scholars and Historians together to think about disorder:Pathways from Disorder to Order: Where History Meets Theory.
Research Interests:
Interview with Ukranian weekly magazine FOCUS, focusing mostly on After Defeat. Published August 14, 2017.
Research Interests:
An interview about Turkish politics (in Norwegian) with Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Bu söyleşiyi Star Kitapla Nisan 2013de yaptım, daha sonra Haziran 2013de (Gezi zamanı) çok kesintiye uğramış şekilde yayınladılar. Buraya koyduğum versiyonu orijinal röportajdır.
Hollings Center websitesinden artık ulaşılamıyor o yüzden buraya ekliyorum.
No longer accessible from the Hollings Center website, unfortunately.
Research Interests:
Abstract: In this article, we argue that hierarchy-centered approaches to IR promise to deliver what anarchy-centered approaches have not: a framework for theorizing and empirically analyzing world politics as a global system—rather than... more
Abstract: In this article, we argue that hierarchy-centered approaches to IR promise to deliver what anarchy-centered approaches have not: a framework for theorizing and empirically analyzing world politics as a global system—rather than just an international one. At the core of this proposition are three features of hierarchical systems as they are represented across the growing IR literature on the topic. First, the structures of differentiation at the core of hierarchical systems are deeply implicated with power. Hierarchical systems are thus intrinsically political. Second, in world politics, hierarchies stratify, rank, and organize the relations not only among states but also other kinds of actors as well, and often even a mix of different actors within a single structure of differentiation. Third, there are many different kinds of hierarchical relations in world politics, each of which generate different ‘logics’ influencing social, moral, and behavioral outcomes. This essay illustrates the promise of hierarchy-centered approaches through review and analysis of key IR scholarship. We show, first, that hierarchy has been understood in the IR literature in two ways: narrowly, i.e. as a relationship of legitimate authority; and broadly, i.e. as intersubjective manifestations of organized inequality. The scholarship also reveals that hierarchy operates in a variety of different ways that range from ordering solutions to deep structures. We identify three such ‘logics’ that have been fruitfully explored in IR scholarship and that can form the basis of a future research agenda: hierarchy as an institutionalized functional bargain between actors (a logic of trade-offs); hierarchy as differentiated social and political roles shaping behavior (a logic of positionality); and hierarchy as a productive political space or structure (a logic of productivity). In doing so, we also show how hierarchy promises a more integrated theoretical framework for IR from which will follow more cohesive analytical and empirical insights into contemporary world politics.