Narrow Results

Leading theorists of major schools of thought in international relations disagree over the root causes of the ongoing war in Ukraine. This paper examines the merits and bases of the theories or explanations provided by each major IR school. It explores the dominant arguments concerning the nature and trajectory of the ongoing war, the prospects for its resolution, and its strategic effects on the international system with a particular emphasis on China. We argue that scholars’ views on these topics are significantly influenced by their theoretical orientations within international relations. Furthermore, strategic thinkers and policymakers, identified as homines theoretici or feminae theoreticae, are themselves deeply influenced by their theoretical understandings of the world, which in turn shape their normative engagement with world affairs. However, the interplay between theoretical perspectives and practical realities hinges on the dynamics of power and objective material conditions on the ground.

The rise of the “Middle Kingdom”, China, has been a source of intense academic debate amongst the Western scholars. On the one hand, the pessimists epitomized the “rise of China” as a threat to the US-led liberal international order. They provided a one-sided and biased analysis. On the other hand, the “rise of China” is portrayed as that of a peaceful rising power which is neither a threat nor a changer of the existing international order. Apart from these opposing perspectives, the US-led liberal international order has been facing an internal crisis within the liberal states. This shows that history has never been going as the liberal prophets predicated. The manifesto of “liberalism is the only governing ideology of post-Cold War period” is now falsified by the rise of populism and nationalism in the countries who drafted the manifesto of “end of history”. Alongside this, the inherently unjust system of the US-led liberal international order has also been facing increasing challenge from the emerging powers of the rest, notably China. This paper thus examines the implication of the rise of China to the US-led liberal international order by taking the “One Belt and One Road Initiative” (BRI) as a case. I argue that through the BRI, China envisioned a new equitable international order that can replace the prevailing exploitative order being established by the “Western powers” during colonialism. On the one hand, BRI foreshadows that China is a dissatisfied actor of the existing order and it is a revisionist power. On the other hand, BRI itself is a liberal project. Thus, BRI is not at odds with liberalism. It is functioning under the liberal order, but envisioned a new international order. Thus, it can be argued that BRI seems to be a liberal project challenging the US-led unipolar world order intended toward a more inclusive and transformative world order.

Vietnam and India became exceptional friends in the context of globalization and global and regional security in the Indo-Pacific Ocean. India paid a significant consideration to South East Asia and expanded its role in this region in the early 21st century. Meanwhile, Vietnam is one country that experienced a thriving economy in its international and regional integrations. This country has a pressing demand for bilateral and multilateral cooperation with all countries in the world. Especially, the objective of rising India’s soft power along with its hard power contributed to promoting India’s benefits and involvement in Southeast Asia and Vietnam. Likewise, Vietnam has been fully aware of India’s intervention in disputes in the South China Sea and its well-meaning plans to tighten relations with Vietnam over various fields. Vietnam considered India as a partner to conduct Vietnam’s soft power. Since Strategic Partnership (2007), Vietnam has accelerated this relation through cultural exchanges, cultural projects, and shared values of Indian culture. Thus, the image of Vietnam becomes familiar to Indian people. Likewise, India encouraged Vietnam to hold cultural events and academic seminars to exchange ideologies, opinions, and plans for many domains. Vietnam is also a goal of India’s soft power in Southeast Asia. This paper aims to examine cultural diplomacy in Vietnam’s foreign policy in Vietnam–India diplomatic relations mainly based on theories of Liberalism, public diplomacy, and soft power. Thus, it clarifies cultural diplomacy in Vietnam and India’s foreign policy. Finally, the author would like to anticipate the scenario of Vietnam–India cultural diplomacy in the future.

Many factors have contributed to the current wave of anti-globalization sentiments in the advanced world. This paper focuses on one of such factors, MNEs’ job-offshoring through their overseas networks of operation and its impact on the US working class. To this end, the “ladder of economic development a la Schumpeter” is presented as an analytical model from a structuralist point of view. Within this framework, the relations of innovation-driven structural change, transmigration of industries from more advanced to emerging economies at the hands of MNEs, and the globalization-afflicted working class and communities in the US are examined as closely intertwined, co-evolutionary phenomena. Four MNE-related sources of globalization angst and social costs are then discussed. The paper concludes with a much-needed analysis of the economic rationales for President Trump’s “if you sell here, produce here” jawboning on MNEs.

The three main claims of the discussion are that (i) values and perspectives integral to Judaism are especially congenial to liberal democracy as a political order and had a role in early modern theorizing about the liberal state, (ii) they are also congenial to the market as a basic economic arrangement on account of how Judaism regards the dignity, accountability and independence of the individual, and (iii) while there is no guarantee that the market will benefit everyone it is defensible on the basis of how it constructively interacts with the pluralistic civil society that a liberal order makes possible. Judaism’s core notions of voluntariness and concern for others can contribute to a morally endorsable form of market activity.

The history of hydropolitics does not support the claim that the next war shall be about water. The chapter considers a set of variables, including scarcity, geography, relative power, domestic politics, and international water law, to explain the onset of conflict and initiation of cooperation over transboundary waters. Strategies and tactics for promoting cooperation, and eventually an agreement, between riparians are also discussed. After reading this chapter, you will understand that while political disputes over water do take place (and may become most volatile in otherwise unstable regions) they rarely become violent. You will be equipped with evidence showing that for the same reasons that conflict may arise over a shared-water body, cooperation may also come about. You will gain knowledge of several elements that facilitate both conflict and cooperation over transboundary waters. Finally, you will learn about different tactics used to facilitate cooperation and negotiation over transboundary waters, and understand that the intricacies of conflict and cooperation are of highest importance in otherwise precarious regions where a water dispute may aggravate the already tense political environment.