International Politics

, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 59–77

The domestic politics of international hierarchy: Risk management and the reconstitution of international society

Original Article

Abstract

Recent work has identified new hierarchical relationships within international society. However, few scholars have provided a satisfactory account of what informs their formation, reproduction or constitutional effects for international society. We argue that underpinning the emergence of a more hierarchical international society is a new social logic of risk, which constructs illiberal and/or fragile states as potentially dangerous sites of instability and disorder that pose particular security risks for Western states. We proceed to argue that such risk-based hierarchies are transformative of both inter-state and intra-state relations, by stripping equal political agency from ‘risky’ actors within and without the state. We demonstrate these claims by drawing on examples of international state building in Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific.

Keywords

international society English school hierarchy risk intervention 

References

  1. Aradau, C. and Van Munster, R. (2007) Governing terrorism through risk: Taking precautions (un)knowing the future. European Journal of International Relations 13 (1): 89–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Australian Department of Defence. (2007) Australia's national security: Defence update 2007, http://www.defence.gov.au/ans/2007/pdf/Defence_update.pdf, accessed 5 May 2008.
  3. Bain, W. (2003) Between Anarchy and Society: Trusteeship and the Obligations of Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beck, U. (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, U. (1999) World Risk Society. Malden, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, U. (2002) The terrorist threat: World risk society revisited. Theory, Culture and Society 19 (4): 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beck, U. (2009) World at Risk. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  8. Bull, H. (1977) The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chandler, D. (2006) Empire in Denial: The Politics of State-building. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  10. Clapton, W. (2009a) Risk and hierarchy in international society. Global Change, Peace and Security 21 (1): 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clapton, W. (2009b) Managing risk within international society: Hierarchical governance in the Asia-Pacific. Australian Journal of International Affairs 63 (3): 416–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clapton, W. (2011) Risk in international relations. International Relations 25 (3): 280–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coker, C. (2002) Risk management goes global. Spiked Online, 29 April, http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/00000006D8BB.htm, accessed 11 January 2011.
  14. Council of the European Union. (2003) A Secure Europe in a Better World: European Security Strategy. Brussels: Council of the European Union.Google Scholar
  15. Deudney, D. (1996) Binding sovereigns: Authorities, structures, and geopolitics in Philadelphian systems. In: T.J. Biersteker and C. Weber (eds.) State Sovereignty as Social Construct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 190–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dinnen, S., McLeod, A. and Peake, G. (2006) Police-building in weak states: Australian approaches in Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands. Civil Wars 8 (2): 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Donnelly, J. (2006) Sovereign inequalities and hierarchy in anarchy: American power and international society. European Journal of International Relations 12 (2): 139–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Doyle, M. (1983a) Kant, liberal legacies, and foreign affairs, part one. Philosophy and Public Affairs 12 (3): 205–235.Google Scholar
  19. Doyle, M. (1983b) Kant, liberal legacies, and foreign affairs, part two. Philosophy and Public Affairs 12 (4): 323–353.Google Scholar
  20. Dunne, T. (2003) Society and hierarchy in international relations. International Relations 17 (3): 303–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Giddens, A. (1990) The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and Self-identity: Self and Society in the Late-modern Age. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  23. Goh, E. (2008) Hierarchy and the role of the United States in the East Asian security order. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 8 (3): 353–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gong, G.W. (1984) The Standard of ‘Civilization’ in International Society. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hameiri, S. (2007) The trouble with Ramsi: Re-examining the roots of conflict in Solomon Islands. The Contemporary Pacific 19 (2): 409–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hameiri, S. (2009) Capacity and its fallacies: International state building as state transformation. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 38 (1): 55–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hameiri, S. (2010) Regulating Statehood: State Building and the Transformation of the Global Order. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change. (2004) A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility. New York: United Nations Department of Public Information.Google Scholar
  29. Hobson, J.M. and Sharman, J.C. (2005) The enduring place of hierarchy in world politics: Tracing the social logics of hierarchy and political change. European Journal of International Relations 11 (1): 63–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Howard, J. (2003) Ministerial statement to parliament on the regional assistance mission to the Solomon Islands (RAMSI). Australian Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, 12 August, http://www.pm.gov.au/news/speeches/speech422.html, accessed 24 August 2005.Google Scholar
  31. Hughes, C. (2003) The Political Economy of Cambodia's Transition, 1991–2001. London and New York: Routledge/Curzon.Google Scholar
  32. Hughes, C. (2007) Transnational networks, international organizations and political participation in Cambodia: Human rights, labour rights and common rights. Democratization 14 (5): 834–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jarvis, D.S.L. (2007) Risk, globalisation and the state: A critical appraisal of Ulrich Beck and the world risk society thesis. Global Society 21 (1): 23–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lake, D.A. (2003) The new sovereignty in international relations. International Studies Review 5 (3): 303–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lake, D.A. (2007) Escape from the state of nature: Authority and hierarchy in world politics. International Security 32 (1): 47–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lake, D.A. (2009) Regional hierarchy: Authority and local international order. Review of International Studies 35 (S1): 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lambach, D. (2006) Security, development and the Australian security discourse about failed states. Australian Journal of Political Science 41 (3): 407–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Libicki, M.C. (2001) Global networks and security: How dark is the dark side? In: R.L. Kugler and E.L. Frost (eds.) The Global Century: Globalization and National Security. Washington DC: National Defense University Press, pp. 809–824.Google Scholar
  39. Mendelsohn, B. (2009) Bolstering the state: A different perspective on the war on the jihadi movement. International Studies Review 11 (4): 663–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. NATO. (1991) The Alliance's Strategic Concept Agreed by the Heads of State and Government Participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council. Rome: NATO.Google Scholar
  41. Owen, J.M. (1994) How liberalism produces the democratic peace. International Security 19 (2): 87–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Paris, R. (2004) At War's End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. PIF. (2007) Pacific Islands Forum Review of the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands. Suva: Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat.Google Scholar
  44. Rasmussen, M.V. (2002) ‘9–11’: Globalisation, Security and World Order. Copenhagen: Danish Institute of International Affairs. Working Paper 2002/2.Google Scholar
  45. Reus-Smit, C. (2005) Liberal hierarchy and the licence to use force. Review of International Studies 31 (S1): 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Russett, B. (1993) Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Sodhi, G. (2008) Five Out of Ten: A Performance Report on the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands. Sydney: Centre for Independent Studies, Issue Analysis No. 92.Google Scholar
  48. Solana, J. (2003) The EU security strategy: Implications for Europe's role in a changing world, S0230/03, Berlin. 12 November, http://www.europa-eu-un.org/articles/en/article_3006_en.htm, accessed 15 November 2008.
  49. United States Department of Defense. (2008) National defense strategy. June, http://www.defenselink.mil/news/2008%20national%20defense%20strategy.pdf, accessed 11 January 2011.
  50. Waltz, K. (1979) Theory of International Politics. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  51. Wheeler, N. (2000) Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. White House. (1998) A national security strategy for a new century. October, http://www.fas.org/man/docs/nssr-98.pdf, accessed 16 March 2006.

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Social Sciences and International Studies, University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Asia Research Centre, School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Murdoch UniversityWestern AustraliaAustralia

Personalised recommendations