The dollar is seeing its hegemony exhausted and its world reserve status threatened. The concept of virtual currencies is becoming increasingly appealing, particularly the Bitcoin.
“Nationalism”, asserts Fred Halliday, “has been one of the formative processes of the modern world”[1]and many argue that nationalist ideology continues to play an important part in the political discourse and decisions of the developed and developing world. In the dialogue of this essay I will; briefly define the ‘nationalist ideal’ and the complications such a definition raises; examine the nature of contemporary nationalism and whether this can be ascribed as ‘new nationalism’; ascertain the impact that modernity and globalisation has on the nationalist ideal; and present a discussion on the relevance of nationalism in the conduct of politics in the United States, with particular focus upon the internationalist scope of American nationalism and the need to securitize subjectivity in times of uncertainty and existential anxiety.
“When I entered the service,” wrote Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, “there was no such thing at all.” Within the six centuries of the French diplomatic system diplomacy evolved from its ad-hoc, temporary status in political society into foreign services that practiced within a distinct profession.
The devastating financial crises that have hit developing nations in Latin America and Asia over the past several decades have given rise to numerous rallying calls to reform the “international financial architecture.” Liberalizing the financial system to foreign capital flows have contributed to immense domestic political and economic turmoil, and in some nations even to violence.
The propagation of liberal economic policies by states, particularly the US, paved the way for the globalisation of finance and production which enabled Transnational Corporations (TNCs) to share power with states and other actors. States are no longer the only important actors domestically or internationally.
This essay explores the partial “success” of sanctions in Libya and their “failure” in the case of North Korea, before looking at the issue of integrative complexity and the current sanctions regime in Iran.
Foreign Policies are designed with the aim of achieving complex domestic and international agendas. It usually involves an elaborate series of steps, in which domestic politics plays an important role. Additionally, the head of the government in most cases is not an individual actor. Foreign Policy decisions are usually collective and/or influenced by others in the political system.
This essay argues that, for the English School, war is an essential component of international relations that is regulated by “norms”. Prominent English School thinkers believe that war should be waged with reference to morality and justice (with rules formulated to that effect) and that the purpose and existence of war is as an instrument of international society used to enforce international justice.
Dealing with the perpetrators of mass atrocity and conflict is at the heart of questions about transitional justice and rebuilding the state following mass violence.
The administrations of President Bush and President Obama have not provided many more details on how they assess just what these targeting practices are or how they operate. While they offer assurances that their procedures meet the necessary requirements of the laws of war in terms of distinction and proportionality, they have not offered any evidence of the actual overview process.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
