What, When, and Where, Then, is the Concept of Sovereignty?
It is difficult to overstate the importance of the concept sovereignty for international relations (IR). And yet, understanding the historical emergence of sovereignty in international relations has long been curtailed by the all-encompassing myth of the Peace of Westphalia. While criticism of this myth has opened space for further historical inquiry in recent years, it has also raised important questions of historical interpretation and methodology relevant to IR, as applying our current conceptual framework to distant historical cases is far from unproblematic. Central among these questions is the when, what, and how of sovereignty: from when can we use “sovereignty” to analyze international politics and for which polities? Can sovereignty be used when the actors themselves did not have recourse to the terminology? And what about polities that do not have recourse to the term at all? What are the theoretical implications of applying the concept of sovereignty to early polities? From different theoretical and methodological perspectives, the contributions in this forum shed light on these questions of sovereignty and how to treat the concept analytically when applied to a period or place when/where the term did not exist as such. In doing so, this forum makes the case for a sensitivity to the historical dimension of our arguments about sovereignty—and, by extension, international relations past and present—as this holds the key to the types of claims we can make about the polities of the world and their relations.
The Uses of Comparisons: A Critical Review of Approaches to Comparisons in Development Studies
This article discusses different forms of comparisons in development studies and some of the justifications that are used for making them. The main questions I discuss are the following: First, how are comparisons used in development studies? Second, how should comparisons be carried out? I distinguish between two main forms of comparisons. First; there are what I call asymmetrical comparisons, where one compares a case to an exemplar or model. In development studies, this form of comparison usually takes the form of comparing a given phenomenon in the West with instances of the same phenomenon in countries outside the West (the state, the economy, the family structure, etc.). The aim of the comparison is to understand the non-Western case, while the Western case is used as a means to reach such understanding. Second, there are what I call symmetrical comparisons, where the cases compared are given equal treatment, and where the aim of the comparison is to reach a better understanding of all the cases included in the study. The article discusses three different forms of symmetrical comparisons: comparisons-as-quasi-experiments, interpretive comparisons and comparative historical analysis, and concludes that symmetrical comparisons based on comparative historical analysis are the best approach to comparative studies.
Somalia: A Political Economy Analysis
Somalia has been without a central authority for more than a quarter century. An entire generation is growing up without experiencing stability and security, basic human rights, and economic prosperity. There is no functioning central government with authority over the entire country, extreme weather impacts the country unmitigated, and social challenges such as corruption are rampant. This bears several risks, such as support for radical Islamist groups, such as Al-Shabaab, posing a threat to domestic and international security, or a brain drain with large number of people fleeing the instability and conflict in Somalia. Informal governance actors, formal local authorities, and the private sector have filled the gaps in providing security, education, and health services. Yet, powerful formal and informal, national as well as international actors have vested interests in a weak state or governance failure, with conflict and instability becoming self-perpetuating. This political economy analysis sheds light on the actors, their interests, and power relationships, thus providing a better understanding of these arrangements and their relation with the wider state-building efforts.
Colombia between peace and war : The 2018 presidential elections and the way forward
The presidential elections of 2018 are expected to have significant implications for the matter of peace, justice and conflict resolution in Colombia. Since conflict intensity rose considerably in the 1980s, presidential elections have been greatly influenced by the candidates’ approaches to the conflict and how to deal with illegal armed groups, particularly the FARC. What visions of peace do the 2018 presidential candidates have, and what could the implications be for the current peace agreement with the FARC? The candidates, rightwing and frontrunner Iván Duque and left-wing candidate Gustavo Petro, promote dissimilar visions of peace for Colombia. These reflect a deeper political polarization within the country, a key issue the next president will have to deal with.
Nye toner i norsk europapolitikk
(Only in Norwegian) Regjeringen varsler taktskifte for Norges EU-strategi. Det kommer til rett tid og med forfriskende begrunnelser.
Polen mellom fortid, notid og framtid
2015 markerer eit viktig skilje i Polens nyare historie. For fyrste gong etter den store politiske omveltinga i 1989 fekk landet ei rein fleirtalsregjering og ein president frå same politiske parti.
European security as practice: EU–NATO communities of practice in the making?
This book aims to show practice approaches at work in the fields of European diplomacy and security broadly conceived. It sets out to provide readers with a hands-on sense of where research on social practices and European diplomacy, security and foreign policy currently stands. The book reviews how practice approaches have evolved in International Relations (IR) and brings together an unique set of contributions which highlights how insights from practice approaches can be applied to advance research on a number of key issues in these fields. While the debate about practices in IR goes beyond the case of diplomacy, the latter has become a showcase for the former and this book continues the debate on practices and diplomacy by zooming in on the European Union. Examples of issues covered include the evolution of EU-NATO relations seen from the perspective of communities of practice, burden sharing as an anchoring practice for European states’ involvement in crisis management operations, the practical knowledge shaping the EU’s responses to the Arab Uprisings, agency as accomplished in and through EU counter-piracy practices and the political resistance to Israeli occupation and the non-official recognition of Palestine performed by EU diplomats. Thus, by focusing on specific practices and analytical mechanisms that contribute to understand the transformations of European diplomacy, security and foreign policy, this book provides essential readings to anyone interested in innovative ways to grasp the contemporary challenges that face the EU and its member states. The chapters originally published as a special issue of European Security.