Abstract
The end of the cold war has presented the field of international relations with an unparalleled challenge. Even if we take an anti-positivistic stand and do not expect the study of international relations to be most of all of prediction but of understanding and interpretation, it is obvious that as a research project international politics has become more difficult to manage. The apparent randomness and unpredictability of the events of the past few years have led many scholars to look for alternative modes of explaining international relations. Thus for instance chaos theory and postmodernism (see Chapter 7) have emerged in the agenda of international relations.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For an extensive (and provocative) view on the complexity of the research field and its current situation see James N. Rosenau, Global Voices. Dialogues in International Relations (Boulder, San Francisco and Oxford: Westview Press, 199
John Vasquez, The Power of Power Politics. A Critique (London: Frances Pinter, 1983).
K. J. Holsti, The Dividing Discipline. Hegemony and Diversity in International Theory (London: Allen & Unwin, 1987).
Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society. A Study of Order in World Politics (London: Macmillan, 1977) pp. 18–19.
Peter van Ham, ‘The European Community after Hegemony: The Future of European Integration in a Multipolar World’, International Relations, 11 (5): 451–67 (1993).
See, for instance, Raymond Vernon, Sovereignty at Bay. The Multinational Spread of US Enterprises (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973).
See Paul Kennedy, Preparing for the Twenty-First Century (New York: Random House, 1993).
See, for instance, Ernst B. Haas The Uniting of Europe (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958).
Richard Mackenney, Sixteenth-Century Europe. Expansion and Conflict (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1993).
Jyrki Käkönen, Natural Resources and Conflicts in the Changing International System. Three studies on imperialism (Aldershot: Avebury, 1988) pp. 147–53.
See Caroline Thomas, The Enviroment in International Relations (London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1992).
Mansbach et al., The Web of World Politics. Nonstate actors in the Global System (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1976) p. 256.
See for example Raymond Aron, Paix et guerre entre les Nations (Paris: Calmann—Lévy, 1962) p.69.
For example the case of the Gulf War, see Joseph Camilleri and Jim Falk, The End of Sovereignty? (Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 1992) pp. 139–70.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1999 The United Nations University/World Institute for Development Economics Research, Katajanokanlaituri 6B, 00160 Helsinki, Finland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lähteenmäki, K., Käkönen, J. (1999). Regionalization and its Impact on the Theory of International Relations. In: Hettne, B., Inotai, A., Sunkel, O. (eds) Globalism and the New Regionalism. The New Regionalism. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-27268-6_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-27268-6_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-68708-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-27268-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)