International Relations

WE WELCOME ALL PANEL AND PAPER PROPOSALS ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. BELOW ARE SOME SPECIFIC IDEAS FROM THE SECTION CHAIRS. International Norms in Conflict ‘International norms in conflict’ has a dual meaning. Firstly, it refers to the (formal and informal) rules and ethics regulating state behavior in times of crisis and war. In the transition from international relations to global politics, the emergence of new regimes, new actors, and new technologies constantly challenges the principles at the foundation of our global society. But while some norms are consequently reformulated, reinterpreted, or replaced, others are instead reinforced through states’ practices and statements. How do we explain the long-term prevalence of some norms while others are rapidly changing? And what are the events or developments triggering normative change? A second interpretation draws attention to the fact that the various norms in international politics can actually be conflicting: not only do different states have different principles, a single state can also uphold different standards when dealing with different ‘enemies’ or when facing them in different situations. How do states deal with different normative standards, different interpretations of international codes of conduct, and different attitudes towards the use of force? And when do norms themselves become a source or legitimation of conflict? This section welcomes panels and papers that attempt to address these questions, either from a theoretical, empirical, or normative perspective. A list of panel suggestions can be found below. Panels 1. New wars, new actors – and new norms? The evolution of international norms might to some extent be attributable to the changing nature of conflict and warfare, captured in part by Mary Kaldor’s concept of ‘new wars’. New wars involve networks of state and non-state actors, and tend to be fought within instead of between states. As most conflicts are thus no longer inter-national, warring parties may not feel obliged to adhere to the formal rules of war as established under international law. How does the involvement of global and local, as well as public and private actors affect morality in conflict situations? 2. Ethics in modern warfare The technological revolution in warfare has – especially for western armies – decreased the necessity to engage in physical combat, leading to the emergence of what we can call ‘cyber wars’ or even ‘virtual wars’. While many of the practices associated with these types of wars, including the use of drones and the execution of ‘targeted killings’, are the subject of extensive ethical debate, they are not yet subject to international regulation. How does the increasing technologization of warfare change our perception and pursuit of justice? 3. State sovereignty and international intervention Despite the persistence of the principle of Westphalian sovereignty, states consider it justified to intervene in the affairs of other states in some situations. States can have different motives to do so (be they legal, ethical or political), but even within these categories it is often difficult to predict which situations will warrant intervention. When and why does international intervention take place – and when does it not? Which dilemmas occur between sovereignty and other principles (or purposes) in international politics and how are they solved? 4. State sovereignty and the right to self-determination Sovereignty, one of the guiding principles of international society, frequently appears to be at odds with the right to self-determination. Particularly when claims for self-determination translate into demands for secession, we tend to witness the international community’s reluctance to recognize such claims. When do sovereignty and self-determination fail to coexist? How many compromises are states willing to make in order to preserve their sovereignty? And why is the right to self-determination so seldom recognized when resulting in demands for secession? 5. The war on terrorism and the evolution of international norms Since the attacks on the World Trade Center on 11 September 2001, the United States has unleashed a War on Terror that is yet to be won. Although ‘Terror’ has already taken many forms – e.g. Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and most recently Islamic State – the ‘War’ seems to be characterized by a single guiding principle: everything is justified. Do terrorists indeed require or deserve more radical measures than other enemies? Has the War on Terror changed politicians’ and citizens’ perspectives on what is morally acceptable? And how much of their freedom are civilians willing to sacrifice in order to feel more secure? 6. Morality, ethics and justice in International Relations Perceptions of the role that international norms and ethics play in contemporary international relations are largely determined by the theoretical position one has in the field. For example, realists and constructivists tend to take opposing positions when debating whether international norms have any significant impact on international political conduct. What are the conflicting views on the pursuit of justice and morality in international politics – or the lack thereof? And how do these theoretical perspectives adapt to changing circumstances? Biographies Feike E.M. Fliervoet MSc Feike Fliervoet is a PhD researcher at the Department of Social and Political Sciences at the European University Institute since September 2015. She holds a BSc in International Development Studies from Wageningen University and an MSc in International Relations and Diplomacy from Leiden University. Her PhD project focuses on the causes of cohesion and fragmentation in separatist movements, specifically looking at the roles played by separatist and incumbent state institutions in these processes. Her research interests include ethnic conflict, nationalism, self-determination, rebel governance, state failure, and international normative theory. Femke E. Bakker MPhil Femke Bakker is a PhD candidate at Leiden University’s Institute of Political Science since September 2013. Earlier she received an MPhil for the Research Master in Political Science of Leiden University. Her research focuses on the empirical testing of the several explanations for the democratic peace thesis, in particular the influence of political culture of different political regimes on individuals of these societies, with regard to their support for the use of force in international relations. Her research interests include political culture, political behavior, the democratic peace thesis, experimental methods, and theories of international relations.