British Journal of Politics and International Relations

vLex
Publisher:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Publication date:
2021-10-06
ISBN:
1369-1481

Issue Number

Latest documents

  • Do international rankings affect public opinion?

    International rankings push governments to adopt better policies by providing comparative information on states’ performance. How do citizens respond to this information? We answer this question through a preregistered survey experiment in Israel, testing the effect of rankings in the fields of human rights and the environment. We find that citizens respond to international rankings selectively. Informed about a high ranking given to their country, citizens tend to express a more positive assessment of the country’s performance. By contrast, they seem to dismiss poor rankings of their country. We further find that poor rankings on a polarising issue, such as human rights, might face a particularly strong resistance from citizens. Overall, our results engage with and support recent scholarship sceptical of the impact of international shaming on public opinion. Even gentle shaming – expressed through a low numerical grade – might not be well received by the public.

  • Status Signalling in the Indo-Pacific: Strategic Spinning, Military Posturing, and Vaccine Diplomacy

    The Indo-Pacific region has emerged as a critical geopolitical platform. Can major powers and regional states avoid conflict? This article explores the concept of status signalling to better understand the region. Status signalling aims to demonstrate a state’s preferred ranking in international society. By applying this concept to new empirical domains, the article shows how status signalling offers fresh insights into regional trends. As an example of strategic spinning, the emergence of the Indo-Pacific reshapes strategic thinking and diplomatic practice in the 21st century. While countries may engage in military posturing to signal their preferred status, the rising competition in the region is not always a zero-sum game. Countries can signal status by providing international public goods in non-military domains. The United States and China need to find ways to handle the potential problem of status dilemmas. Meanwhile, all countries should prudently manage competing expectations from multiple audiences.

  • Neoclassical Realism, Global International Relations, and the unheard echoes of Realist practices from the South

    Neoclassical Realism popularised by including context into a structuralised worldview. However, far from a novelty, Global South scholars have been promoting similar Realist course corrections, reducing parsimony, and increasing explanation. This article compares Ayoob’s Subaltern Realism, Escudé’s Peripheral Realism, and Yan’s Moral Realism, showcasing how originality is displayed via hybridisation, mimicry, and denationalisation of ideas. There are two complementary goals: first, stress similarities and differences between these strands and Neoclassical Realism and, second, challenge the ongoing project of subsuming Realism to the Global International Relations agenda through Neoclassical Realism, as it has yet failed to incorporate these Global South ideas. I argue that acknowledging that these theories can promote core–periphery dialogue and instigate progress within the canon is essential for any Global North scholar interested in a ‘globalized Realism’. Finally, socioeconomic asymmetries and interdisciplinarity are central to building a Global International Relations Realism as well as recognising the persistent inequalities within International Relations knowledge production.

  • The permanency of mass atrocities: The fallacy of ‘never again’?

    The terminology of ‘never again’ has been studied in Sociology, Cultural Studies and History, yet remains neglected in International Relations. This is despite its centrality in debates over humanitarian intervention, the Responsibility to Protect and mass atrocity prevention. To foster a conversation over the term’s use, this article uses an interdisciplinary approach to show how the meaning of ‘never again’ has changed over time. Building on this, we analyse five real-world problems: (1) the quantitative problem, (2) the nuclear problem, (3) the regime change problem, (4) the weak state problem and (5) the P5 problem. We find the blanket call of ‘never again’ oversimplifies the complexity of mass atrocity prevention and creates an unrealistic goal. Going forward, we call on those invoking the phrase to explain what they mean by it and why they are using it as part of a broader reassessment of the term’s use in International Relations.

  • Situating realism, the ethnographic sensibility, and comparative political theory within the methodological turn in political theory

    Contextualist and empirical analyses have recently become important tools in political theory due to a growing ‘methodological turn’ in the discipline. In this article I argue that realism, the ethnographic sensibility in political theory, and comparative political theory should be considered as part of this methodological turn. I show that they share its diagnosis of a gap between political theory and politics and its two principal motivations in closing it. However, I argue that the distinct contribution of realism, the ethnographic sensibility, and comparative political theory is that they highlight a challenge for the methodological turn in that attention to context may widen the distance between political theory and politics. I conclude by suggesting that this is not an insurmountable obstacle and that it in fact bolsters the evaluative function of methodological political theory, keeping it distinct from political science.

  • Explaining sender–receiver gaps in signalling: Australia’s ‘Pacific Step-up’ and Solomon Islands’ multi-alignment

    Amid growing strategic competition, regional powers have intensified their engagement with Pacific Island Countries. This article examines Australia’s ‘Pacific Step-up’, a signature foreign policy initiative of the Scott Morrison government (2018–2022), from a signalling perspective. Through the Step-up, Australia sought to affirm its resolve to be partner of choice for Pacific Island Countries. This was not cheap talk but led Canberra to invest substantially in its ties with the region. Despite this and significant prior Australian engagement leading to a bilateral security pact, Solomon Islands’ government signed an additional security agreement with China in 2022. How can we explain this sender–receiver gap? I argue that close attention to the agency of domestic actors on the receiver side and the context in which such agency occurs – in this case, an extended history of insecurity in the Pacific country – provides us with analytical leverage when examining concrete instances of signalling.

  • Imaginaries of trauma and victimhood: The role of the ‘China threat’ in Trump’s populism of the privileged

    This article speaks to an established interest of International Relations scholars in the construction of the ‘China threat’ in US political discourse. We advance recent works which have argued that the rise of China has contributed to the success of populism in the United States and Western liberal democracies more widely. Specifically, we transpose the concept of the ‘populism of the privileged’ to the international realm to understand how narratives of status loss nurture perceptions of collective trauma and victimhood. We argue that the concept helps explain why Trump’s anti-China populism is centred on the counterintuitive articulation of an American underdog identity at the domestic and international levels. It sheds light on why populist narratives of unjust suffering have grip even if supporters stem from comparatively privileged groups. Victimhood-centric narratives are always relational and, as we show, the imaginary of lost status is a powerful device in the populist toolbox.

  • Mapping the landscape between pacifism and anarchism: Accusations, rejoinders, and mutual resonances

    Pacifism and anarchism share some territory and have cross-pollinated across historical contexts, but are also distinct traditions and movements, with voices in each holding serious reservations and criticisms of the other. Identifying and critically discussing these reservations helps correct widespread misunderstandings in the scholarship and the wider public, thereby also presenting arguments for those outside either tradition to reevaluate their own assumptions and analyses. Anarchist qualms about pacifism and nonviolence include: disputes about the effectiveness of nonviolence; a distrust of the origins and compromises of pacifism and nonviolence; and complaints about the censoring effects of nonviolence in social movements. Pacifist qualms about anarchism include: its support for violence; and its radicality. Each accusation is nuanced or countered with arguments grounded in the indicted tradition. Shared concerns and mutually resonating themes that emerge in the process include: critiques of state violence, militarism and structural violence; and arguments about means as ends-in-the-making.

  • Muddied waters: Freedom-of-navigation operations as signals in the South China Sea

    Freedom-of-navigation operations (FONOPs) led by the United States have become a prominent policy tool in the South China Sea. These operations, however, have caused much confusion and consternation in the region despite the limited legal purpose that they officially serve. Why? This article departs from existing research by examining FONOPs as a form of signalling. Utilising an original dataset on US FONOPs in the South China Sea, we explain why and how FONOPs are ambiguous signals. Because of the nature of FONOPs using warships, the complexities in the maritime environment, and the irregularity of FONOPs, serious sender–receiver gaps emerge in the South China Sea regarding whether FONOPs signal resolve, coercive intent, and/or intentions to check certain states’ broader ambitions. Our analysis reveals that some signalling interpretations of FONOPs in the region are more plausible than others, thus helping to reduce the signalling ambiguity of these operations.

  • Making words harmless: Why politicians survive character assassination attacks

    Character assassination, a specific type of negative campaigning, has been intensely investigated through the lenses of the circumstances and content of attacks. However, we know little about why some politicians survive and others do not. The present article addresses this gap in the literature and identifies the reasons for political survival following character assassination attempts. It compares 20 cases from the last two decades and uses qualitative comparative analysis to test the effect of five potential causes: power relations, gender, response, media coverage and the complexity of the attack. The results indicate that male politicians who face attacks from the same level of power, those who adjust their response to the attack’s complexity, and cases where the media do not extensively cover the attack all have higher chances of survival. The findings broaden the understanding of the character assassination dynamics and ways of protection against it.

Featured documents

Add as a preferred source on Google