Liberalism, international terrorism, and democratic wars

International Relations

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 107-114

  Dunne, Tim ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 62549120375     PISSN: 00471178     EISSN: 17412862     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0047117808104156     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. I would like to thank Ken Booth for suggesting that I submit this article, and Li Meiting for providing valuable research assistance.
2. M. C. Williams, 'Identity and the Politics of Security', European Journal of International Relations, 4, 1998, pp. 204-25.
3. K. Waltz, 'The Continuity of International Politics', in K. Booth and T. Dunne (eds), Worlds in Collision: Terror and the Future of Global Order (Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2002).
4. A line of argument which led Stanley Hoffmann to argue that international affairs have been the 'nemesis' of liberalism. See T. Dunne, 'Liberalism', in J. Baylis, S. Smith and P. Owens (eds), The Globalization and World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, 4th edn (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 108-23.
5. The term 'terrorism' is fundamentally about the threat or use of force - this sets such actions apart from other instruments of political change such as demonstration or passive resistance; terrorism requires an impact beyond that immediately effected by a violent event - acts of terror are designated to create extreme anxiety and fear beyond the immediate target of the violence; finally, terrorism is political - violence is not undertaken for reasons of personal ambition or financial gain.
6. R. O. Keohane, 'International Institutions: Two Approaches', International Studies Quarterly, December 1988, pp. 379-96.
7. For a persuasive critique of liberal rationalism, see C. Reus-Smit, 'The Strange Death of Liberal International Theory', European Journal of International Law, 12(3), 2001, pp. 573-94.
8. This distinction has in the main been applied in debates about structural realism, with Waltzians being on the defensive wing, in contrast with followers of Mearsheimer being characterized as offensive. There are many sources for this debate; for a good overview, see the discussion in J. J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: Norton, 2001).
9. M. Wight, 'Why Is There No International Theory?', in H. Butterfield and M. Wight (eds), Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the Theory of International Politics (London: Allen and Uwin, 1966), p. 29.
10. For an outstanding reader on this topic, see A. Geis, L. Brock and H. Müller (eds), Democratic Wars: Looking at the Dark Side of Democratic Peace (London: Palgrave, 2006).
11. See, among others, T. Dunne '"The Rules of the Game are Changing": Human Rights in Crisis Post-9/11', International Politics, 44(2-3), 2007, pp. 269-86.
12. See R. O. Keohane, 'The Public Delegitimation of Terrorism and Coalition Politics', in Booth and Dunne, Worlds in Collision.
13. J. S. Levy, 'Domestic Politics and War', Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 4, 1988, pp. 653-73.
14. T. Risse-Kappen, 'Democratic Peace - Warlike Democracies?: A Social Constructivist Interpretation of the Liberal Argument', European Journal of International Relations, 1(4), 1995, pp. 491-517.
15. M. Doyle, 'Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs: Part 1', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 12, 1983, pp. 205-35. Also see M. Doyle, 'Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs: Part 2', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 12, 1983, pp. 323-53.
16. A. Flibbert, 'The Road to Baghdad: Ideas and Intellectuals in Explanations of the Iraq War', Security Studies, 15(2), 2006, pp. 310-52.
17. M. C. Williams nicely draws out the liberal republican convergences with neo-conservatism in 'What is the National Interest? The Neoconservative Challenge in IR Theory', European Journal of International Relations, 11, 2005, pp. 307-37. As does N. J. Rengger, 'Democracy, Peace and War: Perspectives from Political and Sociological Theory', in Geis et al., Democratic Wars.
18. T. Caruthers, Critical Mission: Essays on Democracy Promotion (Washington: Carnegie, 2004), p. 34.
19. YouGov, 'A Possible War with Iraq', 14-16 March 2003. Other polls taken on the eve of war support what I have called 'the multilateral bounce' in public opinion. A 5 March Mori/Ipsos poll put support for a UNSC-led war at 75 per cent, dropping to 24 per cent if the UN did not approve the action and no proof was found that Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction. 'War with Iraq', 5 March 2003.
20. L. Freedman 'Selling the Threat', Survival, 46(2), 2004, pp. 7-49 at p. 43.
21. Polls suggest a majority of opinion in the UK supported the NATO-led war against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
22. C. Kaufmann, 'Threat Inflation and the Failure of the Marketplace of Ideas: The Selling of the Iraq War', International Security 29(1), 2004, p. 6.
23. Speech on the Middle East, the White House, 3 April 2002, available at: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020404-1.html (accessed 20 October 2008).