Ever since the so called ‘interparadigm debate’ in the 1970s and 1980s, the discipline of International Relations is perceived to be characterised by a series of paradigms. Even though a range of post-positivist theories have sprung up in recent years, leading some scholars to proclaim the post-positivist era, positivism is likely to remain the dominant paradigm in the discipline.

Sovereignty can be said to be the fundamental pillar on which international relations take place. It is sought by territories claiming independence and forcibly defended by those who had it granted. It has also been one of the most debated concepts in International Relations in the last 20 years, particularly since the end of the Cold War.

Classical realists explain international politics by focusing on human nature and, apart from Carr, they perceive power as the ultimate goal of states, like Mearsheimer. For classical realists anarchy is not the primary focus when explaining different state policies. Hence, classical realism remains more of a foreign policy guide than a theory like the one Waltz wanted to introduce.

Sex tourism has become a significant contributor to the income of the tourism industry in recent years. Yet, how have we come to define it? In what ways has postcolonialism assisted in constructing our understanding of it? And, how might we extend the application of postcolonial discourses to assist in developing that comprehension?

In light of the War on Terror, conceptions of security are evolving. Focus on national security is, and has been, waning as the sovereign state begins to lose some of its pre-eminence. Many security analysts claim the process of globalisation and it’s associated ‘risks’ are largely outside the control of nation states and that only the development of a global community can deal with this adequately.