Advertisement

International Society and the Academic Study of International Relations

  • Kai Alderson
  • Andrew Hurrell
Chapter

Abstract

Bull’s importance in the academic study of international relations has long been recognized, but precisely where and how his work fits in is more contested. There is no doubt that he is a central figure in what has come to be called the English School of international relations — in terms of both his core focus on the idea of international society and of his view of the appropriate methods by which the subject should be studied.1 His reception in the United States, however, is more complex. Although his work on strategic studies won him very broad acclaim, and his attack on behaviouralism achieved widespread notice, The Anarchical Society and his broader ideas about international society have always fitted somewhat uneasily into the debates and academic categories of US international relations.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    See the illuminating account by Tim Dunne, Inventing International Society (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1998), especially Chapter 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. see Roy Jones, ‘The “English School” of International Relations: a Case for Closure’, Review of International Studies, 7: 1 (1981), pp. 1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Sheila Grader, ‘The English School of International Relations’, Review of International Studies, 14: 1 (1988), pp. 29–44, and reply by Peter Wilson in 15: 1 (1989), pp. 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 9.
    James L. Richardson, ‘The Academic Study of International Relations’, in J. D. B. Miller and R. J. Vincent (eds), Order and Violence (Oxford: Oxford University Press 1990), p. 149.Google Scholar
  5. 13.
    On this view of norms see Friedrich Kratochwil and John G. Ruggie, international Organization: A State of the Art or an Art of the State’, International Organization, 40 (1986), pp. 753–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 15.
    See also Andreas Osiander, The State System of Europe, 1640–1990: Peacemaking and the Conditions of Stahility (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 16.
    Fred Halliday and Justin Rosenberg, interview with Kenneth Waltz’, Review of International Studies, 24: 3 (July 1998), p. 382.Google Scholar
  8. Max Weber, ‘The Profession and Vocation of Politics’, in Peter Lassman and Ronald Speirs (eds), Weber: Political Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 354–5.Google Scholar
  9. 20.
    James S. Coleman, Foundations of Social Theory (Cambridge: Belknap/ Harvard University Press, 1990), p. 242.Google Scholar
  10. 21.
    Robert O. Keohane, ‘lnstitutionalist Theory and the Realist Challenge after the Cold War’, in David A. Baldwin (ed.), Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), pp. 273: 4Google Scholar
  11. Robert Axelrod: ‘What works well for a player is more likely to be used again, while what turns out poorly is more likely to be discarded’, ‘An Evolutionary Approach to Norms’, American Political Science Review, 80 (December 1986), pp. 1095–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 22.
    Stanley Hoffmann, ‘Rousseau on War and Peace’, American Political Science Review, 57: 2 (June 1963), p. 320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. See also Donald Hanson, ‘Thomas Hobbes’ “highway to peace”’, International Organization, 38: 2 (Spring 1984), pp. 329–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 24.
    For a more detailed comparison of regime theory and the international society tradition see Andrew Hurrell, ‘International Society and the Study of Regimes’, in Volker Rittberger (ed.), Regime Theory and International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), pp. 49–72.Google Scholar
  15. See also Hayward Alker’s insightful distinction between Bull’s ‘world society problematique’ and the rationalist ‘cooperation under anarchy problematique’, in Hayward R. Alker, Rediscoveries and Reformulations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), Chapter 11, especially pp. 355–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 28.
    This issue was central to the work of Wight and Bull, l’or an overview see Hedley Bull, ‘The Emergence of a Universal International Society’, in Hedley Bull and Adam Watson (eds), The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984), pp. 117–26.Google Scholar
  17. 29.
    David Caron, ‘The Legitimacy of the Collective Authority of the Security Council’, American Journal of International Law, 74: 4 (1993), pp. 552–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gelson Fonseca Jr, A Legitimidade e Outras Questöes Internacionais (Sẽo Paulo: Paz e Terra, 1998), pp. 33–248.Google Scholar
  19. 30.
    On this question see Ian Harris, ‘Order and Justice in “The anarchical society”’, International Affairs, 69: 4(1993), pp. 725–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 33.
    H. L. A. Hart, The Concept of Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984).Google Scholar
  21. 37.
    On legitimacy see Thomas M. Franck, The Power of Legitimacy among Nations (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  22. 39.
    Bull, ‘International Law and International Order’, International Organization, 26: 3 (Summer 1972), p. 583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 43.
    James Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), reviewed in Times Literary Supplement, 18 December 1978.Google Scholar
  24. 45.
    See Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political, trans, by Georg Schwab (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), pp. 25–37.Google Scholar
  25. See Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1959), p. 10 and Chapters XVIII and XIX.Google Scholar
  26. 46.
    On this latter point see Pasquale Pasquino, ‘Political Theory, Order, and Threat’, in Ian Shapiro and Russell Hardin (eds), Political Order. (Nomos), XXXVIII (1993), pp. 19–40.Google Scholar
  27. 47.
    For an excellent overview of social constructivism see John G. Ruggie, Constructing the World Polity (London: Routledge, 1998), especially pp. 11–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 48.
    See, for example, Tim Dunne, ‘The Social Construction of International Society’, European journal of International Relations, 1: 3 (1995), pp. 367–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 49.
    Alexander Wendt, ‘Constructing International Politics’, International Security, 20: 1 (1995), pp. 71–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 50.
    For an overview see also Audie Klotz, Norms in International Politics: The Struggle Against Apartheid (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995), Chapter 2.Google Scholar
  31. 51.
    This characterization of Diplomatic Investigations occurs in a review of Michael Donelan (ed.), The Reason of States, Times Literary Supplement, 28 March 1978.Google Scholar
  32. 54.
    For example, Erik Ringmar, Identity, Interest, and Action: A Cultural Explanation of Sweden’s Intervention in the Thirty Years War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 60.
    See, for example, his review of Pierre Revouvin and Jean-Baptiste Duroselle’s Introduction to the History of International Relations (London: Pall Mall Press, 1968) in which he argued: ‘What is desirable is that there should take place some fusion of diplomatic history with inquiry into the nature of international society and the international system’; BP.Google Scholar
  34. 65.
    See James Fully (ed.), Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988).Google Scholar
  35. For an excellent overview of the issues see Terence Ball, Reappraising Political Theory (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995).Google Scholar
  36. 69.
    See Chris Brown, International Relations Theory: New Normative Approaches (London: Routledge, 1992).Google Scholar
  37. 72.
    See Michael Freeden, Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  38. see Melvin Richter, The History of Political and Social Concepts: A Critical Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kai Alderson
  • Andrew Hurrell

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations