The Tragedy of Great Power Politics

Therefore, the seeker after the truth is not one who studies the writings of the ancients and, following his natural disposition, puts his trust in them, but rather the one who suspects his faith in them and questions what he gathers from them, the one who submits to argument and demonstration, and not to the sayings of a human being whose nature is fraught with all kinds of imperfection and de‹ciency. Thus the duty of the man who investigates the writings of scientists, if learning the truth is his goal, is to make himself the enemy of all that he reads, and, applying his mind to the core and margins of its content, attack it from every side. He should also suspect himself as he performs his critical examination of it, so that he may avoid falling into either prejudice or leniency. (Ibn al-Haytham)1

국제정치이론 = Theory of international politics

Transatlantic international relations (IR) theory has more or less neglected the international relations of East Asia. This relative neglect has come in different forms: excluding East Asian cases from analysis, including East Asian cases but miscoding or misunderstanding them, or including them but missing the fact that they do not confirm the main findings of the study. A review of the East Asia–related literature on three important clusters of theorizing—structural theories of conflict, institutional design and efficacy, and historical memory—suggests that this neglect of the region (and other regions) may come at a cost to transatlantic IR, not only in terms of data problems but also in terms of omitted or downplayed explanatory variables and theoretical arguments.

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.polisci.040908.120058

What (If Anything) Does East Asia Tell Us About International Relations Theory

The Age of apology: facing up to the past

The Politics of the Nazi past in Germany and Austria: Art, David: New York: Cambridge University Press, 231 pp., Publication Date: December 2005

How can Japan put its past behind? Scholars, journalists, and activists frequently argue that Japan cannot solve its “history problem” unless it follows West Germany's lead in offering contrition for World War II violence. Into this debate, Jennifer Lind's Sorry States: Apologies in International Politics offers an original and provocative contribution. Lind argues that while countries should acknowledge past atrocities, frequent public apologies can be domestically polarizing and diplomatically counterproductive. Sorry States outlines a theory of remembrance and threat perception and tests it in a comparative study of Japanese-South Korean and Franco-German relations after World War II. Its methods, data, and findings will interest not only East Asianists, but also scholars of international reconciliation and security studies more broadly. This roundtable presents three critical essays in addition to a response by the author. They discuss the mechanisms through which historical memory influences perceptions of threat, the relative weight of ideational versus material factors in threat perception, and whether changes in international norms and economic interdependence may increasingly pressure countries to confront past violence.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/1FA72BC2EF812EB3885A4BCCDF271A74/S1598240800006706a.pdf/div-class-title-roundtable-discussion-of-jennifer-lind-s-span-class-italic-sorry-states-apologies-in-international-politics-span-div.pdf

Jennifer Lind

Papers

Roundtable Discussion of Jennifer Lind'S Sorry States: Apologies in International Politics

Is japan back? measuring nationalism and military assertiveness in asia's other great power