The History of International Thought
Being a distinct discipline entails being able to recount the disciplinary history and pre-history, and in IR this has led to a sustained engagement, first with the history of international thought in the classical sense, then with historiography. Over the last decades, scholars have increasingly come to see International Relations Theory neither as the recurrence of ancient patterns of thought nor as a miraculous conception of the early 20th century. Rather, continuous stories have been written, where IR has become tied to a wide variety of previous thought. In this volume we explore this scholarship in breadth, explicitly opposing the notion of “great traditions” and “great debates”, and focusing primarily on the challenges, and on works undermining, redirecting or expanding the canon.
Historical International Relations
As a quarry for data, testing-ground for theory and site of investigation, history has been one of the unacknowledged partners of International Relations. The last two decades has witnessed both a substantial increase in the scope of historical IR scholarship and in the sophistication of methodological approaches to history, accompanied by a rapidly increasing (and multidisciplinary) interest in the history of international thought, as well as an ever more sophisticated historiography of the discipline itself. This Major Work is structured in a way to engage with the key recent developments in the field of international relations, providing the reader with an overview of approaches to history in IR; the history of international thought/historiography; and the emergence of the state and the state system.
Semi-cores in imperial relations: The cases of Scotland and Norway
Recently, the field of International Relations has seen increased interest in international hierarchy, and also an upswing in the analytical study of imperial logics of rule. Nonetheless, existing structural models of empire focus on core-periphery dynamics, and so cannot explain polities that display elements of both core and periphery. Therefore, I offer the new concept of ‘semi-cores’. Semi-cores are a specific form of historical political associations whereby certain imperial provinces are different from the others in terms of the close relationships it maintains with the imperial metropolis. Semi-cores are different by virtue of being relatively similar. The conceptualisation of semi-cores is followed by a section illustrating its logic, examining the relatively unfamiliar cases of Scotland and Norway and their position within the Danish and British empires, respectively. Although being separate imperial provinces, these were tightly connected to an imperial core. This concept helps us better understand imperial logics, and in the process shows how cultural factors can be formalised into accounts of structural logics of rule, impacting our understanding of both historical and contemporary hierarchical international affairs.
The formative years: Norway as an obsessive status-seeker
This chapter shows how status concerns were central to how Norway related to the wider world during the formative nineteenth century: status and identity were inextricably intertwined. It argues that Norwegian politics throughout the nineteenth century were deeply concerned with status and status seeking. When Norwegians started discussing foreign politics and foreign policy, it was in terms of peace, prosperity and status, with the people closely linked to all these phenomena. The many active NGOs as well as the constant references to duties and a Norwegian mission indicate that this explanation must be taken seriously. Even though the resources spent internally in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs have been modest, the sheer mass of public attention paid to peace issues has probably made it harder to discuss other matters in Norwegian foreign policy. Various Norwegian politicians have noted that peace activism has given them better access to great-power decision-makers.
International Relations Pluralism and History—Embracing Amateurism to Strengthen the Profession
This article approaches the possibility of achieving pluralist International Relations research through engagements with history/History. There are serious sociological and disciplinary challenges to achieving pluralism, most importantly related to the need to make a mark and a career in one specific discipline and the constant diversification of disciplines. Even so, drawing on the literature of amateurism, understood as engaging in an activity for the love of it, it is argued here that a spirit of engaged amateurism in dealing with history offers an important opportunity for exploring commonalities and fostering pluralism both within the discipline and across disciplinary boundaries.
Omverdenen som utfordring – imperieoppløsning og folkestyrets begrensning
Hvordan skal man som ny stat forholde seg til omverdenen? Dette var et av de spørsmålene som kom opp til tidlig og heftig debatt på Eidsvoll i 1814, og som delte forsamlingen på midten. Unionspartiet ville ha bred drøfting av forholdet til andre stater, mens selvstendighetspartiet foretrakk å overlate dem til Christian Frederik. I denne artikkelen settes argumentene fra debatten i 1814 inn i en bredere idéhistorisk kontekst. Fremveksten av det vi i dag kaller «utenrikspolitikk» forstås her i tett sammenheng med gradvis differensiering av politikkbegrepet og grensedragning mellom stat og samfunn. Utenrikspolitikk forstås dermed som det som skiller ikke bare mellom statens utside og dens innside, men også mellom stat og samfunn. Debatten i 1814 gir et øyeblikksbilde av denne utviklingen, med arven fra eneveldet så vel som nye ideer om folkelig deltagelse.
Benjamin de Carvalho
Benjamin de Carvalho er forsker 1 ved NUPI. Hans forskningsinteresse ligger mellom tre hovedområder: Han jobber med problemstillinger knyttet til...
Halvard Leira
Hovedområder i Halvard Leiras forskning er utenrikspolitikk og diplomati, med særlig vekt på Norge. Han har også forsket på internasjonale relasjo...
Nina Græger
Nina Græger er tilknyttet NUPI som forsker 1 i bistilling i Forskningsgruppen global orden og diplomati. Hun er også instituttleder ved Institutt...
Kari M. Osland
Kari Margrethe Osland (PhD) direktør ved NUPI.Oslands arbeid har fokusert overveiende på konfliktdynamikk, opprør, fredsoperasjoner og fredsbyggin...