Risk and hierarchy in international society

Global Change, Peace and Security

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 19-35

  Clapton, William ^a  

^a MURDOCH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Constitutional transition; Democracy; English school; Globalisation; Hierarchy; International society; Liberalism; Pluralism; Risk; Temporal and spatial de bounding; United kingdom; United states

Indexed keywords

EID: 70349732772     PISSN: 14781158     EISSN: 14781166     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14781150802659267     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Robert Jackson discusses this transition in terms of a shift from a regime of positive sovereignty, wherein states are obliged to conform to positive domestic criteria in order to be recognised as sovereign, to a negative sovereignty regime in which the internal affairs of the state are no business of international society.
2. Robert H. Jackson, Quasi States: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).
3. Andrew Linklater and Hidemi Suganami, The English School of International Relations: AContemporary Reassessment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 179.
4. Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Avon Books, 1992).
5. See Christian Reus-Smit, 'Liberal Hierarchy and the Licence to use Force', Review of International Studies 31, no. S1 (2005): 71-92.
6. Gerry Simpson, Great Powers and Outlaw States: Unequal Sovereigns in the International Legal Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)
7. Christopher Hobson, 'Democracy as Civilisation', Global Society 22, no. 1 (2008): 75-95
8. Tim Dunne, 'Society and Hierarchy in International Relations', International Relations 17, no. 3 (2003): 303-20
9. William Bain, Between Anarchy and Society: Trusteeship and the Obligations of Power (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).
10. Ulrich Beck, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (London: Sage, 1992)
11. Ulrich Beck, World Risk Society (Malden: Polity, 1999).
12. Ulrich Beck, 'The Terrorist Threat: World Risk Society Revisited', Theory, Culture and Society 19, no. 4 (2002): 40-42.
13. Mikkel Vedby Rasmussen, The Risk Society at War: Terror, Technology and Strategy in the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 206.
14. Beck, World Risk Society, 1.
15. Anthony Giddens, Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age (Cambridge: Polity Press), 35-69.
16. John Handmer and Paul James, 'Trust Us and Be Scared: The Changing Nature of Contemporary Risk', Global Society 21, no. 1 (2007): 120.
17. Yee-Kuang Heng, 'The "Transformation of War Debate: Through the Looking Glass of Ulrich Beck's World Risk Society', International Relations 20, no. 1 (2006): 71.
18. Claudia Aradau, Luis Lobo-Guerrero and Rens Van Munster, 'Security, Technologies of Risk, and the Political: Guest Editors' Introduction', Security Dialogue 39, no. 2-3 (2008): 147-54.
19. Darryl S.L. Jarvis, 'Risk, Globalisation and the State: A Critical Appraisal of Ulrich Beck and the World Risk Society Thesis', Global Society 21, no. 1 (2007): 23-46, 30.
20. Beck, 'The Terrorist Threat', 41.
21. Beck, Risk Society, 12.
22. This phrase is from former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's infamous reply to a question posed at a NATO Press Conference in June 2002, in which he argued that there are '. no "knowns". There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. So when we do the best we can and we pull all this information together, and we then say well that's basically what we see as the situation, that is really only the known knowns and the known unknowns. And each year, we discover a few more of those unknown unknowns'.
23. Donald Rumsfeld, 'Press Conference by US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld', NATO Defence Minister's Meeting, 6-7 June, http://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2002/s020606g.htm (accessed 10 May 2007).
24. Mikkel Vedby Rasmussen, '"It Sounds Like a Riddle": Security Studies, the War on Terror and Risk', Millennium 33, no. 2 (2004): 381-95.
25. Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (London: Macmillan, 1977).
26. Daniel Philpott, Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped the Modern World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997)
27. Christian Reus-Smit, The Moral Purpose of the State: Culture, Social Identity and Institutional Rationality in International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999).
28. Reus-Smit, The Moral Purpose of the State, 6.
29. Philpott, Revolutions in Sovereignty, 12.
30. Ian Clark, Legitimacy in International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).
31. Alexander Wendt, 'Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics', International Organization 46, no. 2 (1992): 391-425.
32. Gerrit W. Gong, The Standard of 'Civilisation' in International Society (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984).
33. Robert H. Jackson, The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 15.
34. Claudia Aradau and Rens Van Munster, 'Governing Terrorism through Risk: Taking Precautions, (un)Knowing the Future', European Journal of International Relations 13, no. 1 (2007): 89-115.
35. It is notable that both Philpott and Reus-Smit fail to discuss contemporary constitutional transition within international society, neither offering an analysis of international society in the post-Cold War era.
36. Adam Watson, The Evolution of International Society: A Comparative Historical Analysis (London: Routledge, 1992).
37. Hedley Bull and Adam Watson, eds., The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984).
38. Interestingly, although Reus-Smit and Clark both undertake a historical analysis of the constitution of international society, neither includes decolonisation as a fundamental moment of constitutional revision within international society. Conversely, Philpott argues that decolonisation, along with Westphalia, is a key moment of constitutional transition within international society.
39. Gerry Simpson, 'Two Liberalisms', European Journal of International Law 12, no. 3 (2001): 537-71.
40. Simpson, Great Powers and Outlaw States, ix-xv.
41. Reus-Smit, The Moral Purpose of the State, 6.
42. This is particularly evident when Simpson considers the war in Afghanistan in the context of his thesis concerning sovereignty equality and anti-pluralism. Here, Simpson essentially argues that US intervention in Afghanistan (and Kosovo) is representative of a form of anti-pluralism and hierarchy within international society. What is missing from Simpson's account is an analysis of precisely why such anti-pluralist and hierarchical trends have re-emerged.
43. Simpson, Great Powers and Outlaw States, 319-51.
44. Antony Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
45. Dunne, 'Society and Hierarchy in International Relations', 303-20.
46. Yee-Kuang Heng, War as Risk Management: Strategy and Conflict in an Age of Globalised Risks (New York: Routledge, 2006)
47. Heng, 'The "Transformation of War" Debate'.
48. Heng, War as Risk Management
49. Heng, 'The "Transformation of War" Debate'
50. Mikkel Vedby Rasmussen, 'Reflexive Security: NATO and International Risk Society', Millennium 30, no. 2 (2001): 285-309
51. Rasmussen, "It Sounds Like a Riddle" '
52. Rasmussen, The Risk Society at War.
53. Darryl S. L. Jarvis and Martin Griffiths, 'Risk and International Relations: A New Research Agenda', Global Society 21, no. 1 (2007): 1.
54. Aradau et al., "Security, Technologies of Risk and the Political', 147.
55. Beck, Risk Society
56. Beck, World Risk Society
57. Deborah Lupton, Risk (New York: Routledge, 1999).
58. Beck, World Risk Society, 3.
59. Heng, War as Risk Management, 49.
60. Jan Aart Scholte, Globalisation: A Critical Introduction (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000), 8-9
61. Mikkel Vedby Rasmussen, '"9-11": Globalisation, Security and World Order', Working Paper 2002/2 (Copenhagen: Danish Institute of International Affairs, 2002), 6.
62. Bain, Between Anarchy and Society, 5.
63. James Gow, Defending the West (Cambridge: Polity, 2005), 59.
64. Australian Department of Defence, Australia's National Security: Defence Update 2007, http://www.defence.gov.au/ans/2007/pdf/Defence_update.pdf (accessed 5 May 2008), 14.
65. Giddens, Modernity and Self-Identity, 35-69.
66. Rasmussen, '"9-11": Globalisation, Security and World Order', 11.
67. Christopher Coker, "Risk Management Goes Global', Spiked Online, http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/00000006D8BB.htm (accessed 30 June 2007).
68. Richard Cooper, The Breaking of Nations: Order and Chaos in the Twenty-First Century (London: Atlantic Books, 2004), 17.
69. Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilisations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996).
70. Robert D. Kaplan, The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post-Cold War (New York: Vintage Books, 2000).
71. Cooper, The Breaking of Nations, 18.
72. Bain, Between Anarchy and Society, 143.
73. Ian Clark, 'Another "Double Movement": The Great Transformation After the Cold War?', Review of International Studies 27, no. 5 (2001): 237-55.
74. David Garland, 'The Limits of the Sovereign State: Strategies of Crime Control in Contemporary Society', British Journal of Criminology 36, no. 4 (1996): 445-71.
75. Nancy Reichman, "Managing Crime Risks: Toward an Insurance Based Model of Social Control', in Research in Law, Deviance and Social Control 8, ed. Andrew T. Scull and Stephen Spitzer (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1986), 164.
76. Rasmussen, The Risk Society at War, 108.
77. Gordon Hughes, Understanding Crime Prevention: Social Control, Risk and Late Modernity (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1998), 59.
78. Reichman, "Managing Crime Risks', 158.
79. Ronald Clarke, Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies (New York: Harrow and Heston, 1992), 4.
80. R.A. Litton, 'Crime Prevention and Insurance', The Howard Journal 21 (1982): 126.
81. Hughes, Understanding Crime Prevention, 72.
82. Coker, "Risk Management Goes Global'.
83. For useful works on democratic peace theory (including critiques), see Michael Doyle, 'Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs', Philosophy and Public Affairs 12, no. 3 (1983): 205-35.
84. Michael Doyle, 'Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs, Part 2', Philosophy and Public Affairs 12, no. 4 (1983): 323-53.
85. Bruce Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993).
86. John MacMillan, 'A Kantian Protest against the Peculiar Discourse of Inter-Liberal State Peace', Millennium 24, no. 3 (1995): 549-62.
87. Tarak Barkawi and Mark Laffey, "The Imperial Peace: Democracy, Force and Globalisation', European Journal of International Relations 5, no. 4 (1999): 403-34.
88. Hobson, "Democracy as Civilisation'.
89. The White House, A National Security Strategy for a New Century, October 1998, http://www.fas.org/man/docs/nssr-98.pdf (accessed 20 November 2006).
90. The White House, The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, September 2002, http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf (accessed 10 February 2005).
91. The White House, National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, September 2006, http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nsct/2006/nsct2006.pdf (accessed 15 October 2006), 9.
92. Tony Blair, "Prime Minister's Speech: Doctrine of the International Community at the Economic Club, Chicago', http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page1297.asp (accessed 20 April 2007).
93. Clark, Legitimacy in International Society, 174.
94. Jackson, The Global Covenant, 15.