which different paths of modern development were open and potential for
broad international relationships was undecided. The Chinese order in East Asia
and the intercession of the West in the mid nineteenth century were contexts
of encounters and inter-civilisational engagement in which Japanese perspectives on civilisation were generated. Asia and the Pacific were often debatably
represented in Japanese perspectives. Solidarity-based versions of relations with
Asia competed with expansionist and militarist ones, and ultimately failed to
consequences of this kind. How successful have they been?
Process-based approaches take the persistent ambiguities that haunt conceptions of civilisations as a point of departure. Analyses of civilisational processes are well known in comparative sociology. But they have also gained
prominence in political science and internationalrelations. A notable exponent of the processual image from sociology is Norbert Elias. The dissemination of his ideas is a contemporary development and therefore subject-matter
for the next chapter. One point to note is that his historical
state of war’,
wrote Rousseau in Du Contrat Social, ‘cannot arise from simple personal
relations’ (III: 357).
As always fascinated by paradoxes – (‘I would rather be a man of
paradoxes than a man of prejudices’, he wrote in Emile (II: 82)) – he noted
the tragic irony that states which had been established to avert civil wars
A civic profession of faith
gave rise to international wars. As he put it in The State of War, ‘we see men
united by an artificial concord, assemble to slaughter one another, and all
the horrors of war arise
Dimitris N. Chryssochoou, Michael J. Tsinisizelis, Stelios Stavridis and Kostas Ifantis
opportunities for moving beyond ‘unicausal theorising’, by integrating three important subdisciplines of general internationalrelations theory:
regime analysis, negotiation theory and intergovernmentalism. The wider theoretical concern revolves around an understanding of the dynamic interplay
between a liberal interpretation of national preference-formation, the rationality of actors pursuing their interests at the central level and the distinct nature
of intergovernmental bargaining within the Community system.
The welcoming aspect of this analysis is that it links the
becomes seriously flawed. One prong of this critique applies to internationalrelations theories that consider states as homogenous entities endowed with a
singular will while the other prong attacks theories of democracy that fail to
consider how all democracies are constituted through their horizontal or
vertical relations to other polities.
Neither is my claim in section 2.1 of
chapter 1 that boundaries
who have subsequently adopted post-functionalist
positions. Also, the critical dialogue they engaged in with modernisation studies conditioned their subsequent trajectory. If internationalrelations scholars
were added, Peter Katzenstein would be in the lead, with Brett Bowden, Martin
Hall, Patrick Jackson, Robert W. Cox, Sadik Unay, Muzzafer Senel and Pavlos
Hatzopoulos following. Others could make the list, including the proponents of
the call for a Dialogue of Civilisations, such as Fred Dallmayr, Michalis Michael
and Fabio Petito.
The group identified by
constellation as a multi-layered global order, consisting of a reformed basis of
solidarity within the nation state, the development of new transnational
forms of political community such as the European Union beyond the nation
state, and the enhancement of international laws and institutions regulating
relations between states and guaranteeing human rights at the global level.
The idea of the postnational constellation entailed a differentiated and
such claims emerge only
once individuals are involved in relations with several states (e.g. through
migration or a history of shifting borders). A normative theory of citizenship
in the international state system must therefore distribute inclusion
responsibilities between states and appropriate norms will generally depend
both on the relation of individuals to states and of states to each other.
The flaws of a single-polity perspective become
Ontologies of connection, reconstruction of memory
Jeremy C.A. Smith
Pacific. But, as
argued in Chapter 4, experiences of colonial intrusion, dispossession, subjection
and dis-embedding can be considered forms of engagement. It was also the case
that forms of engagement in general were far from alien to islander societies.
As an old world, Pacific civilisation was already relational and had a paradigm of
engagement in the relations of exchange that islander societies practised and the
cosmologies that endowed meaning to their connectivity. When European colonisation incorporated Oceanian societies into larger trans-national networks of