Showing papers in "International Studies Review in 2011"

Sanctions Sometimes Smart: Targeted Sanctions in Theory and Practice

Abstract: This essay reviews the literature and origins of the targeted sanctions framework. The development of smart sanctions has solved many of the political problems that prior efforts at comprehensive trade sanctions had created. In so doing, the idea of smart sanctions served as a useful focal point for policy coordination among key stakeholders. Nevertheless, there is no systematic evidence that smart sanctions will yield better policy results vis-a-vis the targeted country. Indeed, in many ways, the smart sanctions framework has been too successful. It would behoove policymakers and scholars to look beyond the targeted sanctions framework to examine the conditions under which different kinds of economic statecraft should be deployed.

Theorizing States’ Emotions

Abstract: This article starts from the assumption that emotions are inherently part of life in the international system, but that this is not as well reflected in the discipline of International Relations. The study of emotions can be incorporated more systematically into the discipline through more rigorous theorizing about how states—as main actors in world politics—experience and act on emotions. To do so, I draw on intergroup emotions theory, an emerging area of research in social psychology. This approach points out the process by which groups come to have emotional reactions, and from there how emotions generate intergroup perceptions and intergroup behavior —or foreign policies in the case of states. Understanding states-as-groups addresses many of the criticisms mainstream IR scholars direct toward the study of emotions, including how individual-level factors such as emotions matter for intergroup relationships.

The Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes: Comparing and Contrasting Findings from Quantitative Research

Abstract: This article uses quantitative methods to deepen and broaden our understanding of the factors that determine the effectiveness of international regimes. To do so, we compare and contrast the findings resulting from two major projects: the Oslo-Seattle Project and the International Regimes Database Project. The evidence from these projects sheds considerable light on the determinants of regime effectiveness in the environmental realm. Clearly, regimes do make a difference. By combining models and data from the two projects, we are able to move beyond this general proposition to explore the significance of a number individual determinants of effectiveness, including the distribution of power, the roles of pushers and laggards, the effects of decision rules, the depth and density of regime rules, and the extent of knowledge of the relevant problem. We show how important insights emerge not only from the use of statistical procedures to separate the effects of individual variables but also from the application of alternative techniques, such as Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), designed to identify combinations of factors that operate together to determine the effectiveness of regimes. We use our results to identify a number of opportunities for additional research featuring quantitative analyses of regime effectiveness. Our goal is not to displace traditional qualitative methods in this field of study. Rather, we seek to sharpen a set of quantitative tools that can be joined together with the extensive body of qualitative studies of environmental regimes to strengthen our ability both to identify patterns in regime effectiveness and to explore the causal mechanisms that give rise to these patterns.

Promise and Pitfalls of Terrorism Research

Abstract: Using a database of recent articles published in prominent political science journals, we show the rapid increase in terrorism research. Given this increased awareness and attention, we identify several problems that still plague the study of political terrorism including definitional problems that lack empirical tests, not distinguishing among different types of terrorism, and using the wrong unit of analysis when designing research. After identifying these problems—especially as they relate to the quantitative study of terrorism—we suggest some solutions. We then apply these suggestions to investigate whether changing the definition of terrorism, different types of terrorism, or changing the unit of analysis affects key predictors of terror events cross-nationally. One of our tests consists of varying the unit of observation to include directed dyads, which offers the potential to test some of the many strategic models of terrorism. Our analysis suggests that varying definitions of terrorism, such as military vs. non-military targets, might not be that consequential, whereas different types of terrorism, such as domestic vs. transnational, could be driven by fundamentally different processes. We also conclude that modeling transnational terrorism differently using directed dyads yields new and interesting insights into the process of terrorism.

Theory and Policy in International Development: Human Development and Capability Approach and the Millennium Development Goals

Abstract: Theory has influenced policy in international development but the interaction has been a two-way process. While theories legitimated new policy, appraisal of policy and experience have given rise to theoretical insights. But of the many competing ideas and theories, which ones influence policy? This article analyzes the influence of Sen's capability and human development approach on the recent evolution of policy agendas in international development, notably the consensus on MDGs and on poverty as the priority concern. It argues that the capability approach played an important role in the contestations over structural adjustment and Washington Consensus policies that led to the new consensus over the MDGs, and help legitimate them, the neoliberal policy approaches of the Washington Consensus remain intact. This illustrates an important distinction between normative and causative ideas. The new consensus has adopted the normative ideas of the capability approach but not the causative ideas. These normative ideas were used to provide a new narrative for international development, not a new policy framework.

Great Powers and Strategic Hedging: The Case of Chinese Energy Security Strategy

Abstract: We present the strategic hedging framework as a structural theory of interstate competition. Strategic hedging extends the logic of traditional balance of power theory in order to account for a wider range of foreign policy behavior, while maintaining a strong emphasis on structural incentives that critics found lacking in the soft balancing approach. We provide a four-step identification mechanism that allows the analyst to spot potential cases of strategic hedging and then to filter out behavior that is better categorized as hard balancing, normal diplomatic friction, or simple power maximization. We use the case of Chinese energy security strategy as an illustrative case study and employ the identification mechanism to demonstrate its viability as a strong example of strategic hedging. Given the importance of energy security within the context of Sino-American relations, this paper not only contributes to the development of new structural theory in international relations, it presents a new interpretation of an important policy issue.

Revisiting an Elusive Concept: A Review of the Debate on Spoilers in Peace Processes

Abstract: In a seminal article, Stedman (International Security, 22, 1997, 5) suggested that the greatest source of risk to civil war peace processes comes from so-called spoilers, leaders, and groups that perceive peace as threatening and use violence to undermine attempts to achieve it. The spoiler concept has since gained significant ground and widespread legitimacy both in the academic literature and in critical policy circles. In the footsteps of this development, however, we suggest that the spoiler concept has been stretched beyond its original meaning and given raise to a number of ambiguities concerning its definition and empirical applicability. This lack of clarity in regard to some of the key aspects of the spoiler concept does not only risk undermining the usefulness of the concept itself, but also risks hampering the accumulation of valuable research on this pertinent topic. This article presents a reflection on a burgeoning research field and aims to contribute to the same by attempting to offer greater conceptual clarity in regard to a number of issues that are the core of the spoiler debate and by presenting a conceptual framework for analyzing spoilers in future research.

Bridging the Beltway–Ivory Tower Gap

Abstract: While some gap between the academic and policy worlds is inherent, it is neither necessary nor beneficial for the “Beltway-Ivory Tower” to be as wide as it is. Three principal factors explain the extent of the gap: academia's dominant organizational culture, which devalues policy relevance; increased role of think tanks as research transmission belts to the policy world; and limited interest of the policy community in academic research. The case for the value of greater policy relevance for the international relations scholarly community is based on the intellectual pluralism of bringing policy relevance in while not driving theory out, intellectual complementarity in the different relative strengths of scholars and policy professionals, and self-interest both in what individual scholars can learn and in being true to the mission of universities. We make three principal bridging the gap recommendations: increase disciplinary incentives for policy relevant scholarship, more programmatic and project-based connectivity, and more policy world experiential opportunities.

The present and future of diplomacy and diplomatic studies

Abstract: Murray, Stuart et al. (2011) The Present and Future of Diplomacy and Diplomatic Studies. International Studies Review, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2486.2011.01079.x Of late, practical and theoretical interest in diplomacy and diplomatic studies has grown, prompting a number of diplomatic scholars to undertake a long overdue stock take of the past, present, and future of the subfield. What follows, therefore are five essays by both senior and junior scholars of diplomacy reflecting on the origins of diplomatic studies, showcasing contemporary scholarship, and suggesting some of the opportunities and challenges the study of diplomacy poses for those working in the broader ISA and International Relations (IR) communities in the future. Its aims are simple: to demonstrate that diplomacy and diplomatic theory are central to a complete understanding of international relations; to illustrate myriad possibilities for fascinating, valuable, and useful cross-fertilizations between diplomatic studies and other fields of study, IR chief among those; and to publicize future diplomatic research tasks and agendas. The authors take diverse approaches but agree on one thing: the need for a strong and active Diplomatic Studies Section in ISA serving as a two-way conduit between practitioners and scholars, alerting the former to the best in IR scholarship while reminding the latter that explanations and understandings of international relations from which diplomacy and diplomats are absent can never be complete. The need for such a conduit has never been more pressing.

The Forum: Emotion and the Feminist IR Researcher

Abstract: This forum addresses a neglected issue in feminist IR research: the question of whether and how emotions should enter our scholarship. Feminist theory and practice have long maintained that politics comes into and can shape the personal realm of all social relations. There is no sharp division between the private and the public, and liberal efforts to demarcate the two can sequester people called women in the private, away from the privileged political and economic sphere associated with public agency (see, Elshtain 1981; Enloe 1989; Tickner 1988). One long-standing philosophical reason given for partnering women and the private sphere is that women supposedly suffer unique bodily passions that bring on mental weaknesses, like an inability to think straight (Rousseau). Indeed, states could be ruined on account of women and their ways (Machiavelli), or would have to be run by men in any case because women would be conquered in the war of all against all (Hobbes). We are ostensibly way beyond those gendered understandings of women and politics, all of them based on Western political theorizing. Yet when it comes to dealing with emotions in academic research and writing, it is usual for feminists in International Relations (IR) to keep their emotions to themselves and sometimes even the emotions of their subjects out of the picture. Not to do so could reinforce the old gender stereotypes; it would also fly in the face of social science rules of research distance and objectivity. That such rules are often quietly adhered to, even when a feminist researcher questions the scientific epistemology that insists on those rules, can be puzzling today. At this moment in the field's history, IR is fragmented into numerous camps, each with its own favorite personages, writings, methodologies, topics, and even journals (Sylvester 2007). It is a …

Global Governance in a Multipolar World: The Case for Regional Monetary Funds

Abstract: The reform of global financial governance is long overdue Recent changes to the governance of the International Monetary Fund partially address the lack of representation of emerging market countries, but not their loss of confidence in the institution In the meantime, alternative and perhaps better approaches to the problems of open economics are being proposed at a regional level We describe these regional monetary funds and discuss their prospects We conclude that because economic interdependence is strongest at the regional level, regional cooperation seems well-suited to a multipolar world

Ordering the World: Academic Research and Policymaking on Fragile States

Abstract: The gap between academic research and policymaking in international relations (IR) is much lamented but poorly understood. Much of what we know about the gap is based on personal anecdotes, untested assumptions, and simplistic conceptions of what counts as policy influence. Using the literature on fragile states as a window into the research-policy interface, this article finds little evidence of scholarship directly influencing policies through specific recommendations and findings. However, academic ideas in this field appear to have important indirect effects on international policy actors – namely, by helping to define and refine understandings of state fragility as a policy problem and by informing the development of operational frameworks for responding to this problem – even though the actors themselves may not be entirely aware of such conceptual influences.

International Ethics and the Responsibility to Protect

Abstract: I examine the roots of “Responsibility to Protect” in international ethics. International responsibility to protect is as a whole at odds with international law, but deeply familiar to Liberal international ethics. But, controversially, I argue that even the Realist and Marxist traditions include commitments to human respect that make humanitarian concerns far from foreign. I then explore how it evolved out of the crisis in Kosovo and the question of its policy significance today in cases in which it has been invoked, ranging from Myanmar to Kenya and Guinea – sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly, successfully and not. My conclusion is that R2P has contributed to the increasing pluralism, contested and contestable, of the normative architecture of world politics, and thus has produced confusion. But, this confusion may reduce as RtoP norms are accumulated in customary law and reshape the discourse of international ethics. In any case, where the alternative to pluralism is clarity that either abandons vulnerable populations or imposes unrealistic expectations of enforced human rights, confusion is a step forward, a resource for responsible policy and the best we are likely to get if we continue to care about both vulnerable populations and national sovereignty.

Conflict Resolution as a Field of Inquiry: Practice Informing Theory

Abstract: This article explores the different approaches to study of conflict resolution from a variety of interdisciplinary perspectives. It argues that CR research is sophisticated and nuanced, addressing both state-level and group-level motivations behind political violence. The article argues that there are two distinct strands within CR scholarship: one that deals with “conflict transformation;” the other which deals with “conflict settlement.” Although these two strands are sometimes seen as offering conflicting interpretations of conflict, we are argue that they are essentially complementary and have much to offer theoretically and practically to policymakers.

Elder Abuse: How the Moderns Mistreat Classical Realism

Abstract: Neorealists narrate their origins by explaining that classical realists committed a multitude of sins and were therefore displaced. The classics unscientifically explained world politics primarily through individual-level characteristics, typically a will to power that drove state behavior and international outcomes. In short, classical realism was inadequately structural and theoretical; thus, neorealists revised them by prioritizing structural factors and putting the paradigm on sound scientific footing. We argue that this narrative is generally incorrect. Classical realists were supremely structural and competently theoretical. Consequently, the realist tradition has much more continuity and richness than presently believed.

The “Problem of Values” and International Relations Scholarship: From Applied Reflexivity to Reflexivism

Abstract: In light of recent discussions of cognitive and ethical dilemmas related to International Relations (IR) scholarship, this paper proposes to engage the “problem of values” in IR as a composite question whose cognitive treatment requires the objectivation of the more profoundly institutional and social processes that subtend its emergence and evolution within the discipline. This analysis is hereby offered as an exercise in reflexive scholarship. Insofar as the question of values constitutes a defining cognitive and moral concern for reflexive knowledge itself, the paper also points to the need for its reformulation within an epistemic framework that is capable of moving beyond reflexivity to Reflexivism proper, understood as a systematic socio-cognitive practice of reflexivity.

Interactions in Transition: How Truth Commissions and Trials Complement or Constrain Each Other

Abstract: While there have been recent advances in theories of transitional justice, there remains a lack of theory about how truth commissions and human rights trials interact with each other to facilitate or constrain efforts at transitional justice. This is an important deficiency to remedy because numerous countries long ago leapt ahead of transitional justice theory by sequencing trials and truth commissions, while the International Criminal Court (ICC) will have to manage relationships with truth commissions as its work accelerates. The aim of this article is to use current literatures on transitional justice and political transitions to build a theory of how trials and truth commissions interact with each other. This will be done in three steps. First, the article will elaborate the goals and critiques of trials and truth commissions in order to provide a foundation for how they might interact. Second, the article will consider these institutions in sequence to understand how they interact when trials operate first, truth commissions first, or when they operate simultaneously. Third, the article will consider these sequences in context to understand how legacies of violence and its termination may affect their relationship. This effort is meant to clarify the theoretical issues at stake in the sequencing of these two important institutions, stimulate debate, and inform institutional design.

Rising Asian Powers and Changing Global Governance

Abstract: International Relations (IR) scholarship is directly in the path of two simultaneous tidal waves. The first is the rise of China and India in the traditional IR terms of military and economic power. The second is the expanding nature of what IR scholarship needs to address, as global integration transforms the nature of the issues to be addressed and numerous trends expand the number and types of relevant actors. Neither theory nor practice is yet coping well with the profound implications of these fundamental changes. Investigating what kind of a world order might emerge from these two simultaneous tsunamis will require an enormous research agenda that explores the roles of ideas, structural factors, and path dependencies across regions and issue areas. This article aims to illuminate a subset focused around the connection between theory and practice as related to two emerging powers. It briefly maps developments in Western IR theory and explores how those connect—or fail to connect—with intellectual and policy currents in the rising Asian giants. It draws on a number of interviews and workshops held in Asia in the past two years that explore how Asian scholars and policymakers are dealing with, and perhaps beginning to shape, the rapidly changing conceptual landscape.

Human Rights and Mass Atrocities: Revisiting Transitional Justice†

Abstract: When gross violations of human rights occur in the form of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, if the United Nations era is really the age of human rights (Henkin 1996), the primary objective should be to stop them in the short run by (i) the diplomacy of conflict resolution and, if necessary, (ii) humanitarian intervention under the “the responsibility to protect.” These processes are covered in other essays in this volume. Here, I address what to do after the fact. The attempt to establish some kind principled justice after atrocities is usually known as transitional justice. Academic and other experts agree that transitional justice (or TJ) emerged as a concentrated subject of policy debate and academic study by the late 1980s and early 1990s because of two primary developments (see Roht-Arriaza and Mariezcurrena 2006; Arthur 2009; Bell 2009; Teitel 2009). First, there was the end of brutal authoritarian regimes in Latin America and various responses in that region. Second, there was the end of repressive European communism and the political space subsequently opened up for various national and international policies. To be sure, the subject of what to do after atrocities and gross violations of human rights is not new (Roht-Arriaza ibid.). For example, when the French intervened in Syria-Lebanon in the late nineteenth century after massacres involving Druze and Christians, the French foreign minister proposed an international commission that would “investigate the outbreak of civil war, bring guilty Syrians and Ottomans to book, pay reparations to the victims, and suggest steps to prevent future catastrophes” (Bass 2009:170–171). In contemporary times, there emerged in practical politics a very lively debate about criminal prosecution, truth or fact finding commissions, apologies and reparations, amnesties and other forms of impunity involved in “just moving on,” memorials, lustration …

Engagement or Entrapment? Scholarship and Policymaking on Asian Regionalism

Abstract: While an interactive relationship between scholars and policymakers is generally regarded as mutually beneficial, there is also the risk of ‘entrapment.’ The latter occurs when scholars, once having proven their usefulness to policymakers and thereby earned their trust, become unwilling to offer dissenting opinions for the fear of risking their access and privileges. Using Asian regionalism as an example, this article argues that the development of regional institutions in Asia has benefitted from the ideas and input of the two main channels of such scholar-official interaction: epistemic communities and track two dialogues, especially during the formative stages of Asian regionalism (both economic and security). But after gaining access, scholars engaged with officialdom in developing regional institutions have found it difficult to dissent from the official line, and in challenging the shortcomings and failures of Asian regional institutions. In Asia, the danger of entrapment has been strong in authoritarian countries. In general, participation by Asian scholars in the policymaking process has suffered from the inability of scholars and think-tankers (especially the latter) to rise above the national interest and question the official position of their own governments, the ubiquitous presence and dominance of government-linked scholars or retired government officials in track two dialogues, the exclusion of social movements form many such dialogues, the presence and influence of non-specialists (in issue areas) in setting their agenda and outcome, and generational gatekeeping (failure to bring in new faces). As a result, the development of a genuine transnational regionalism has been stunted.

The Theory and Practice of Global Governance: The Worst of All Possible Worlds?

Abstract: This article takes the example of global governance in order to reflect on the problematic relationship between theory and practice and on the gap that exists between the academic and policy worlds. That there is a gap between the two worlds is clear. Some insist on the benefits to be gained from trying to bridge the gap, highlighting the contribution that theoretical inquiry can make to the policy world and the responsibility of academics to contribute towards resolving policy challenges. Others argue for the continued importance of a division of labour, stressing that the logic of theoretical enquiry demands analytical and critical distance from power and politics. This article does not examine either of these extreme positions but instead explores the dangers of the middle road. For academics, insufficient awareness of the problematic ways in which theory and practice are inextricably interwoven makes it more likely that they will fall hostage to the politics and parochial prejudices of both time and place. For policymakers and for those who teach public policy, the danger lies in seeking the authority and legitimacy of academic work that purportedly embodies objectivity and detachment but that in fact merely translates the prejudices and preoccupations of the policy world back into a different idiom. An unreflective and uncritical attitude to the relationship between theory and practice can leave the academic study of International Relations in the worst of all possible worlds.

China and the Developing World

Abstract: China, the Developing World, and the New Global Dynamic. Edited by Lowell Dittmer, George T. Yu Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2010. 251 pp., $22.50 paperback (ISBN-13: 978-1-58826-726-9). China's New Role in Africa. By Ian Taylor. Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2009. 227 pp., $55.00 hardcover (ISBN-13: 978-1-58826-636-1). China's foreign policy has experienced major changes since 1949 when the People's Republic of China was established. The Communist state was determined to export revolution, even to the detriment of its relations with many Third World countries, before it became part of the “strategic triangle” in the 1970s. Fundamental changes occurred in the late 1970s when Beijing decided to open up and to start economic reforms. Correspondingly, the developing world was the center of China's foreign relations in the 1950s and 1960s. Its importance started to decline when China became a semi-ally of the United States against the Soviet Union in the 1970s. It was further marginalized in the 1980s when China was preoccupied with improving its relations with the developed countries in its attempt to attract foreign investment and to have a peaceful external environment conducive to its economic development. A turning point happened in the late 1980s and early 1990s. In the wake of Western condemnation and sanctions against China after the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown and the decline of China's strategic importance to the West after the end of the Cold War, China revitalized its policy toward the developing world. China's interest in the developing world has become much more complicated since then. Resources supply and markets are no less important than its political interest. And, as Kurt Campbell points out, China's emergence in the “bleak picture” of the developing world struggling for attention and resources is bound to have enormous strategic implications (Eisenman, Heginbotham, and Mitchell 2007:ix). However, China's new policy directions to the developing world received little attention in academic circles before 2007 when China and the Developing World: Beijing's Strategy for the Twenty-First Century was published. The edited book is claimed to be “the first book-length treatment” of China's relations with the developing …

Forum: Transitional Justice: The Quest for Theory to Inform Policy

Abstract: Transitional justice (or TJ) emerged as a subject of policy debate and academic study by the late 1980s and early 1990s due to two developments (see Teitel 2009; Arthur 2009; Bell 2009; Roht-Arriaza and Mariezcurrena 2006). First, there was the end of brutal authoritarian regimes in Latin America and various responses in that region. Second, there was the end of repressive European communism and the political space subsequently opened up for various national and international policies. A very lively debate thus emerged about criminal prosecution, truth or fact finding commissions (TCs), apologies and reparations, amnesties and other forms of impunity involved in “just moving on,” memorials, lustration or barring human rights violators from holding public office, and more. Academic assertions, and eventually careful studies, followed. The central question in both political and academic circles was: What to do after atrocities or gross violations of human rights, with one central concern being how to prevent their reoccurrence. To track developments, there is now a journal, The International Journal of Transitional Justice. Various Web sites keep us update and provide perspective: “Track Impunity Always,”“Crimes of War Project,”“International Justice Tribune,”“International Criminal Law Bureau.” It is not easy to come to clear conclusions about preferable policies in varying contexts (see especially Minow 1998; also Roht-Arriaza and Mariezcurrena ibid ). The latter break down the subject into policy options—for example, trials versus TCs—and level of action—for example, national versus international. A short forum such as this one can hardly expect to do more than scratch the surface of a very large and complex subject. Yet one can: give a brief introduction that hopefully stimulates, look at developments in two important regions (Africa and Latin America), and discuss TJ in the United States after torture and other gross violations of human rights (and …

Theory vs. Practice: A Symposium

Abstract: This special presidential issue addresses the theory–practice question across major institutions and global challenges. First, what is the influence of scholars on institutions? What accounts for influence or the lack thereof? What type of future engagement should exist for scholars on these institutions? Second, what are acceptable theoretical approaches to a given global challenge? What are the existing policies and practices, and do they coincide with dominant scholarly approaches? What relationship would be most useful between theory and practice on any issue? The 51st International Studies Association Annual Convention and these pages explore the impacts of scholars on policymaking and institutions as well as the limitations of theory in responding to global challenges. Stereotypes obfuscate the complex reality that scholarship matters.

Ellery Stowell and the Enduring Dilemmas of Humanitarian Intervention

Abstract: Ellery Stowell’s detailed study of humanitarian intervention, published in 1921, rewards a close reading today. In this article, I consider two broad themes of his work that continue to be of particular relevance. First, his discussion of the rightfulness of humanitarian intervention is grounded in a concept of responsible sovereignty which is remarkably similar to present-day notions of “sovereignty as responsibility” and “the responsibility to protect.” I suggest that this points to an enduring intimate relationship between sovereignty and responsibility which both advocates and critics of intervention for the protection of populations today have a problematic tendency to either ignore or forget. Second, his argument that external actors possess not merely a right but an obligation to intervene to enforce the protection of populations has clear parallels with the present-day notion that the society of states bears a “responsibility to protect” populations. I observe that, while much has changed, advocates of “the responsibility to protect” continue to struggle to overcome some of the same dilemmas about the “imperfect” nature of this obligation that confronted Stowell.

Coping with Corruption

Abstract: Corruption, Global Security, and World Order. Edited by Robert I. Rotberg Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2009. 497 pp., $39.95 (ISBN-13: 978-0-815-70329-7). Robert I. Rotberg's edited volume, Corruption, Global Security, and World Order , is a comprehensive assessment of global corruption that is easily accessible to most upper-level undergraduate students, yet engaging and complex enough to prove useful to the most seasoned academic. The timeliness and relevance of this volume are unquestionable (Transparency International 2010), as Rotberg himself notes in the opening paragraphs: “Corruption is a human condition and an ancient phenomenon….[and] until avarice and ambition cease to be human traits, corruption will continue to flourish” (p. 1). To empirically defend Rotberg's claim, one need only pick up the newspaper, watch the news, or browse the news Web sites to see that the issue of corruption is rampant. One of the more compelling examples of this issue occurred on the Rush Limbaugh program when a GOP House member, Rep. Darrell Issa, called President Obama “one of the most corrupt Presidents in modern times.” He clarified this statement on CNN by saying he meant the Obama administration, not President Obama (Politico 2011, Available at http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/0111/Issa\_clarifies\_remark\_calling\_Obama_corrupt.html?showall, accessed August 4, 2011). This statement is striking not just in the accusation leveled at the Obama administration, but in that Representative Issa must believe that many modern Presidents were corrupt, and the Obama administration is simply the most corrupt. In general, anyone paying attention to the state of global (and domestic) politics is constantly confronted with issues of corruption. Whether this involves the distribution of funds in post-earthquake Haiti, the difficulties in fighting corruption in Afghanistan, or the plethora of other cases, it is evident that …

Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament: Can the Power of Ideas Tame the Power of the State?

Abstract: The nuclear arms control regime—centered on the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)—faces five challenges: failure of nuclear disarmament by the five NPT-licit nuclear powers (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States); possible cheating by non-nuclear signatories like North Korea and Iran; India, Israel, and Pakistan remaining outside the NPT; terrorists’ interest in acquiring and using nuclear weapons; and the safety, security and proliferation risks of the increased interest in nuclear energy to offset the financial and environmental costs of fossil fuel.

The Myth of Scholarly Irrelevance for the United Nations

Abstract: In the case of the United Nations, scholars have had an impact in fostering ideas and policies, including human development, climate change, global compact, sovereignty as responsibility, and human security. Of the three-headed UN monster—the first UN of member states, the second UN of staff members, scholars constitute a key part of the third UN of those closely associated with the world body but independent from it. Scholars’ roles include research, policy analysis, and idea mongering. They have been able to exert influence as consultants, commissioners, and temporary staffs.