Current events happening around the world, especially the ’humanitarian interventions’ by NATO and the West within the context of the so-called Arab Spring, make the understanding of the role of spheres of influence in international politics absolutely critical. Hast explores the practical implications and applications of this theory, challenging the concept by using historical examples such as suzerainty and colonialism, as well as the emergence of a hierarchical international order. This study further connects the English School tradition, post-war international order, the Cold War and images of Russia with the concept of the sphere of influence to initiate debate and provide a fresh outlook on a concept which has little recent attention.

The conflict in Ukraine and Russia's annexation of Crimea has undoubtedly been a pivotal moment for policy makers and military planners in Europe and beyond. Many analysts see an unexpected character in the conflict and expect negative reverberations and a long-lasting period of turbulence and uncertainty, the de-legitimation of international institutions and a declining role for global norms and rules. Did these events bring substantial correctives and modifications to the extant conceptualization of International Relations? Does the conflict significantly alter previous assumptions and foster a new academic vocabulary, or, does it confirm the validity of well-established schools of thought in international relations? Has the crisis in Ukraine confirmed the vitality and academic vigour of conventional concepts? These questions are the starting points for this book covering conceptualisations from rationalist to reflectivist, and from quantitative to qualitative. Most contributors agree that many of the old concepts, such as multi-polarity, spheres of influence, sovereignty, or even containment, are still cognitively valid, yet believe the eruption of the crisis means that they are now used in different contexts and thus infused with different meanings. It is these multiple, conceptual languages that the volume puts at the centre of its analysis. This text will be of great interest to students and scholars studying international relations, politics, and Russian and Ukrainian studies.

In the past few decades the understanding of the relationship between nations has undergone a radical transformation. The role of the traditional nation-state is diminishing, along with many of the traditional vocabularies which were once used to describe what has been called, ever since Jeremy Bentham coined the phrase in 1780, 'international law'. The older boundaries between states are growing evermore fluid, new conceptions and new languages have emerged which are slowly coming to replace the image of a world of sovereign independent nation states which has dominated the study of international relations since the early nineteenth century. This redefinition of the international arena demands a new understanding of classical and contemporary questions in international and legal theory. It is the editors' conviction that the best way to achieve this is by bridging the traditional divide between international legal theory, intellectual history, and legal and political history. The aim of the series, therefore, is to provide a forum for historical studies, from classical antiquity to the twenty-first century, that are theoretically-informed and for philosophical work that is historically conscious, in the hope that a new vision of the rapidly evolving international world, its past and its possible future, may emerge. Book jacket.

This book presents an analysis of how metaphors are essential elements in the study of international relations. It acknowledges the fact that theory and practice in international relations often rest on common metaphorical concepts which have implications for the ways people around the world pursue their lives. Because of the increased attention metaphors have received as integral elements in political discourse, there is a need to investigate metaphorical concepts that are not neutral in their implications for understanding international relations. Inasmuch as government policy is shaped by metaphorical concepts that originate in the academic realm, and given that scholarly works are therefore partially involved in inspiring policy, the author subjects a range of metaphors in international relations theory to critical interrogation.

This collection of essays by renowned scholar Amitai Etzioni aims to provoke reconsiderations of basic assumptions of foreign policy by students, academics and practitioners. With chapters focusing on the Middle East, China and the EU, as well as articles with a more global focus, the book offers thought-provoking and insightful perspectives on international foreign policy which challenge existing academic debate in the field. It will be of great interest to students, scholars and practitioners of foreign policy and international relations.

How established powers can facilitate the peaceful rise of new great powers is a perennial question of international relations and has gained increased salience with the emergence of China as an economic and military rival of the United States. Highlighting the social dynamics of power transitions, The Struggle for Recognition in International Relations offers a powerful new framework through which to understand important historical cases of power transition and more recently the rise of China and how the United States can facilitate its peaceful rise.

This book argues that river basins represent a particular structural setting in international relations with the potential for generating a dynamic of cooperation among the involved countries. The volume applies the concept of regional cooperation to international river basins to highlight their relevance as a particular space in international relations, emphasizing both the inter-connectivity and transnationalism of international river basins. It addresses the challenges related to resource distribution between up- and down-stream countries, showcasing a variety of examples of cooperation and conflictual relations within various international river basins. Case studies are drawn from across the globe and include the Mekong, the Indus, the Euphrates-Tigris and the Danube international river basins. Each chapter outlines the different aspects which support or undermine cooperation in each case, taking into consideration key areas surrounding resource sharing, national development, environmental considerations and national security. This book will be of great interest to students and scholars with an interest in international river basins, regional cooperation, water resource competition, international relations and environmental politics.

This edited book complements and follows up on the book, Thompson and Volgy et al, Regions, Power and Conflict: Constrained Capabilities, Hierarchy, and Rivalry. It is predicated in part on the paucity of published material available on comparing regional international politics. Monadic, dyadic, and systemic approaches all have their uses and have been exploited extensively. The same cannot be said about comparative regional analysis. The premise is that a great deal of international politics takes place within regional parameters. Most states simply lack the capability or interest in devoting many resources to extra-regional affairs. Yet each region is distinctive. In some, military coups remain common while they have died out as a form of political practice in others. A few have been highly conflictual and then become more pacific, while others persist in their conflict intensity. Some have powerful neighbors with intervention tendencies, while others are surrounded by relatively weak states. Some are rich; others are poor. The point is that regions, all with proper names, have attributes that can be harnessed through comparison to explain why regional behavior differs greatly across the planet. The aim is to replace the proper names with the leading variables that appear to drive behavior. For instance, to shrug and say “that’s the Middle East for you” does not take us very far. Replacing the Middle East label with conceptualization about how a set of small, weak, autocratic states behave subject to high penetration by major powers might take us farther than shrugging off regional identity. We have good reasons to think that comparative regional analysis can deliver an explanatory value-added product just as much as alternative “levels of analysis” can. Ultimately, we might desire to integrate separate levels of analysis, rather than segregating them. But in the short term, we need to encourage comparative regional analysis because it is the least developed perspective. Why that might be the case can be debated, but it stems in part from our disciplinary tendencies for some analysts to specialize in regional behavior largely in a descriptive vein while others prefer to focus on explaining universal behavior. Comparative regional behavior tends to be squeezed out by regional scholars who suspect generalization about behavior and universal scholars who suspect particular contexts such as regions. Comparative regional analysis requires analysts who are willing to explore generalization but acknowledge regional contexts more explicitly than is customary. At the same time, more general substitutes for those regional labels must be introduced if explanatory headway is to be achieved.

Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine administered an unprecedented shock to the European and global energy markets, triggering emergency interventions and market reforms to limit the impact of the crisis on energy prices and supply security. More fundamentally, the supply shock sparked a profound reappraisal of foreign supply and infrastructure dependencies (for example, on China), leading states to adopt new legal initiatives to strengthen the resilience of their clean energy supply chains. Energy geopolitics and supply security are now firmly back at the centre of global energy policy, and in this new geopolitical reality, we critically need to reassess the role of energy law in the creation - and avoidance - of dangerous energy dependencies. Using the 2022 energy crisis as core example, Energy Dependence and Supply Security offers a legal analysis of energy trade and investment as a tool of geopolitical power, an issue seldom considered outside of economic statecraft and energy geopolitics. Anatole Boute's timely analysis illustrates the paradox of energy law and security: legal instruments of energy security have helped create the supply and infrastructure dependencies that allowed for the weaponization of energy. The book examines the legal responses adopted by the European Union to the impact of the Russian energy shock, reflecting on strategies to avoid similar disruptions in the clean energy industry. In turn, it proposes innovative supply security reforms that would allow dependencies to be managed, while still preserving the international collaboration that is needed to accelerate the transition to clean, affordable, and secure energy systems.

Current international relations (IR) theories and approaches, which are almost exclusively built in the West, are alien to the non-Western contexts that engender the most hard-pressing problems of the world and ultimately unhelpful in understanding or addressing the needs surrounding these issues. Our supposedly revolutionary new concepts and approaches remain largely insufficient in explaining what happens globally and in offering lessons for improvement. This deficiency can only be addressed by building more relevant theories. For theory to be relevant in accounting for contemporary international relations, we argue, it should not only apply to, but also emanate from different corners of the current political universe. In other words, diversity and dialogue can only come about when periphery scholars do not just "meta-theorize" but also "theorize." Aydinli and Biltekin propose a new form of theorizing through this collection of work, one that effectively blends peripheral outlooks with theory production. They call this form "homegrown theorizing," or original theorizing in the periphery about the periphery. Arguing that disciplinary culture is oblivious to the diversity that might be achieved by theorizing based on indigenous ideas and/or practices, this book intends to highlight that potential, showing diversity in the background of the authors, because wherever one looks at the world from, paints the picture that is being seen. Therefore, we bring together scholars from Eastern Europe to South Africa, from Iran to Japan to cover the extant diversity in ideas. This work will be essential reading for all students and scholars concerned with the future of international relations theory.