--
Postmodernism is a phenomenon that touches many areas like architecture, arts, philosophy, etc. In its large meaning, postmodernism claims that modern era is over and we now live in a postmodern era where information is everything. It is usually considered a Western phenomenon. The appearance of postmodernism in politics is often associated with the events of May 1968 in France. Mostly developed by French scholars, postmodernism was introduced and rapidly spread in United-States and England. The theory merged with international relations in the mid 1980’s and has been developed in the last few years.
Postmodernism is a phenomenon that touches many areas like architecture, arts, philosophy, etc. In its large meaning, postmodernism claims that modern era is over and we now live in a postmodern era where information is everything. It is usually considered a Western phenomenon. The appearance of postmodernism in politics is often associated with the events of May 1968 in France. Mostly developed by French scholars, postmodernism was introduced and rapidly spread in United-States and England. The theory merged with international relations in the mid 1980’s and has been developed in the last few years.
--
It is not easy to give a precise definition of postmodernism. There is divergence about the meaning of postmodernism and many theorists associated with the theory never really identify themselves as postmodernists. Despite its complexity, postmodernism can be simplified and explained by looking at 1) its opposition to Enlightenment’s ideas; 2) the approach to explain the relationship between power and knowledge; 3) and its textual strategy.
It is not easy to give a precise definition of postmodernism. There is divergence about the meaning of postmodernism and many theorists associated with the theory never really identify themselves as postmodernists. Despite its complexity, postmodernism can be simplified and explained by looking at 1) its opposition to Enlightenment’s ideas; 2) the approach to explain the relationship between power and knowledge; 3) and its textual strategy.
--
Postmodernism can be understood as a reaction against grand theories and universal explanations, such as the Enlightenment, that were developed during the modern period. Postmodernism denies modernism and scientific epistemology achievement. There is a strong incredulity towards metanarrative ( a theory which asserts that it has clear foundations for making knowledge claim). Rorty tried to explain postmodernism by saying that “The modernist assumption was that we had a ‘glassy essence’ that could be rationally perceived and interpreted through particular technique. Postmodern thinking smashes that glass.”
Postmodernism can be understood as a reaction against grand theories and universal explanations, such as the Enlightenment, that were developed during the modern period. Postmodernism denies modernism and scientific epistemology achievement. There is a strong incredulity towards metanarrative ( a theory which asserts that it has clear foundations for making knowledge claim). Rorty tried to explain postmodernism by saying that “The modernist assumption was that we had a ‘glassy essence’ that could be rationally perceived and interpreted through particular technique. Postmodern thinking smashes that glass.”
--
For postmodernists, there is no universal truth, no general unity of mankind or deep identity transcending differences. Truth is not something external to social settings but is part of them, which can be interpreted as construction in postmodernism's term. Postmodernists would probably ask ‘how can history have a truth if truth has an history?’ A good example is how postmodernism understands hegemonic states. Hegemony is seen as a projection of an ideal model of sovereignty, which is not fixed and will change over time and space. Postmodernists would also use genealogy to analyze history. Genealogy emphasizes on the relations between knowledge and power. These elements are supporting each other since there is no knowledge per se, knowledge is always conditioned by history and politics. Knowledge and power are therefore influenced by each other, since one ‘knowledge’ will be chosen over another. Postmodernists for example, try to understand or to see by which mechanisms a sovereign state acquires its identity. They identify two forces behind that construction, and disciplinary practices inside the state and exclusion of ‘others’. By putting in action of those two forces, a state acquires what is currently known citizen as an identity. In that sense, events became ‘real’ because of the way we remembered and recorded them. By the same logic, there is no truth, only competitive perspectives that became momentary true. Taking an example of boundaries here can be useful since postmodernists see them as defining a moment of sovereignty. Postmodernisms view that knowledge, truth and reality are variable, contextual and partial. What really matter is why some events are remembered and how they are shaped as ‘real’ and part of history. Also, the central for postmodernism is how some perspectives became ‘truth’ and how knowledge is conditioned by power.
For postmodernists, there is no universal truth, no general unity of mankind or deep identity transcending differences. Truth is not something external to social settings but is part of them, which can be interpreted as construction in postmodernism's term. Postmodernists would probably ask ‘how can history have a truth if truth has an history?’ A good example is how postmodernism understands hegemonic states. Hegemony is seen as a projection of an ideal model of sovereignty, which is not fixed and will change over time and space. Postmodernists would also use genealogy to analyze history. Genealogy emphasizes on the relations between knowledge and power. These elements are supporting each other since there is no knowledge per se, knowledge is always conditioned by history and politics. Knowledge and power are therefore influenced by each other, since one ‘knowledge’ will be chosen over another. Postmodernists for example, try to understand or to see by which mechanisms a sovereign state acquires its identity. They identify two forces behind that construction, and disciplinary practices inside the state and exclusion of ‘others’. By putting in action of those two forces, a state acquires what is currently known citizen as an identity. In that sense, events became ‘real’ because of the way we remembered and recorded them. By the same logic, there is no truth, only competitive perspectives that became momentary true. Taking an example of boundaries here can be useful since postmodernists see them as defining a moment of sovereignty. Postmodernisms view that knowledge, truth and reality are variable, contextual and partial. What really matter is why some events are remembered and how they are shaped as ‘real’ and part of history. Also, the central for postmodernism is how some perspectives became ‘truth’ and how knowledge is conditioned by power.
--
One of the main claims of postmodernism is that the way in which we construct a society is textual. In this perspective, there is no ‘real’ world but an interpretative experience of the world, like the reading of a text. Two strategies are used; which are deconstruction and double reading. Deconstruction is based on the idea that seemingly stable and natural concepts or relations within language are in fact artificially constructed since there is always a term that has an advantage on the other one. Those oppositions are not neutral but hierarchical since one of the concepts is always better then the other one (good/bad, rich/poor, powerful/powerless, etc.) Deconstruction is a way to show that all theories, discourse or text are based on artificial stabilities produced by those seemingly objective and natural oppositions in language. Double reading is a way to analyze the text. The first reading demonstrates how a studied object appears coherent with itself. The second reading points out the internal tension within the studied object produces by the seemingly natural stabilization in language. This allows the reader to see how certain elements are always hidden to give a global homogeneity and continuity to any texts. There is no good or true reading of the text, only different interpretations. Using the double reading, postmodernism explains that state sovereignty has emerged historically to resolve three contradictions; time/space, universal/particular, and self/other. This theory also argues that the actual stability of the international system as we see it now will not be able to stay for long since it is always challenged by trans-boundary phenomenon like transnational groups, immigrant, and refugees. Some postmodernists thus are questioning the paradigm of sovereignty as a state form.
--
2. Well known Post-Modernists (by Andrea Lucarelli)
--
Since there is no rigid definition of postmodernism in the context of international relations, the problem is it is hard to classify the scholars who follow post-modernismistic approaches. Advocats and proponents of this approach do not use the term “postmodernists” to label their position. However, following some general guide lines characterizing the approach, we know who have been the most influential scholars with their work in shaping the ground of postmodernism approach. Two scholars who influenced postmodernism shaping the basic concepts of the theory in terms of international relations are Nietzsche and Foucault. They, even though not stressing their attention to international relations, have been inspirational to other scholars within the context of postmodern way of approach. The influence of the former is directly connected to genealogy technique that is based on the idea of different perspectives, embodying different sets of value and not serving to apprehend the “real world. This idea has been resumed by others as Campbell in his concept of “narrativizing of reality”, using that to refer to the significance of the event of “September 11”. The latter`s influence on approach is related to the interests to explore connections between power and knowledge. Moreover, along with Nietzche, Focault is important to investigate the relations of power-knowledge, arguing that both are mutually constituted, and, for him, there is no truth outside of power. He suggests in his work, Discipline and Punish, to investigate this relations through an interpretative technique, genealogy. Use of genealogy inside international relations have become crucial to many postmodernists scholar, as one of the main advocats, R.Ashley in “The Geopolitics of Geopolitical space: toward a critical social theory of International Politics”, in which he argues that the construction of borders and the geopolitical culture that accompanies them are crucial areas of international politics that need to be investigated by using interpretive techniques such as 'genealogies', as developed by Nietzsche and Foucault; but also by others, as Campbell in his analysis on the Bosnian War in “National Deconstruction: Violence, Identity, and Justice in Bosnia”, in which he argues that the same event can be represented in different ways, so, Bosnian war can be known only through perspective.
One of the main claims of postmodernism is that the way in which we construct a society is textual. In this perspective, there is no ‘real’ world but an interpretative experience of the world, like the reading of a text. Two strategies are used; which are deconstruction and double reading. Deconstruction is based on the idea that seemingly stable and natural concepts or relations within language are in fact artificially constructed since there is always a term that has an advantage on the other one. Those oppositions are not neutral but hierarchical since one of the concepts is always better then the other one (good/bad, rich/poor, powerful/powerless, etc.) Deconstruction is a way to show that all theories, discourse or text are based on artificial stabilities produced by those seemingly objective and natural oppositions in language. Double reading is a way to analyze the text. The first reading demonstrates how a studied object appears coherent with itself. The second reading points out the internal tension within the studied object produces by the seemingly natural stabilization in language. This allows the reader to see how certain elements are always hidden to give a global homogeneity and continuity to any texts. There is no good or true reading of the text, only different interpretations. Using the double reading, postmodernism explains that state sovereignty has emerged historically to resolve three contradictions; time/space, universal/particular, and self/other. This theory also argues that the actual stability of the international system as we see it now will not be able to stay for long since it is always challenged by trans-boundary phenomenon like transnational groups, immigrant, and refugees. Some postmodernists thus are questioning the paradigm of sovereignty as a state form.
--
2. Well known Post-Modernists (by Andrea Lucarelli)
--
Since there is no rigid definition of postmodernism in the context of international relations, the problem is it is hard to classify the scholars who follow post-modernismistic approaches. Advocats and proponents of this approach do not use the term “postmodernists” to label their position. However, following some general guide lines characterizing the approach, we know who have been the most influential scholars with their work in shaping the ground of postmodernism approach. Two scholars who influenced postmodernism shaping the basic concepts of the theory in terms of international relations are Nietzsche and Foucault. They, even though not stressing their attention to international relations, have been inspirational to other scholars within the context of postmodern way of approach. The influence of the former is directly connected to genealogy technique that is based on the idea of different perspectives, embodying different sets of value and not serving to apprehend the “real world. This idea has been resumed by others as Campbell in his concept of “narrativizing of reality”, using that to refer to the significance of the event of “September 11”. The latter`s influence on approach is related to the interests to explore connections between power and knowledge. Moreover, along with Nietzche, Focault is important to investigate the relations of power-knowledge, arguing that both are mutually constituted, and, for him, there is no truth outside of power. He suggests in his work, Discipline and Punish, to investigate this relations through an interpretative technique, genealogy. Use of genealogy inside international relations have become crucial to many postmodernists scholar, as one of the main advocats, R.Ashley in “The Geopolitics of Geopolitical space: toward a critical social theory of International Politics”, in which he argues that the construction of borders and the geopolitical culture that accompanies them are crucial areas of international politics that need to be investigated by using interpretive techniques such as 'genealogies', as developed by Nietzsche and Foucault; but also by others, as Campbell in his analysis on the Bosnian War in “National Deconstruction: Violence, Identity, and Justice in Bosnia”, in which he argues that the same event can be represented in different ways, so, Bosnian war can be known only through perspective.
--
As we said above interpretation is regarded by postmodernists as necessary and essential. To interpret real word they use “textual interplay”. Derrida in his work “Of Grammatology”, put forward the concept of textuality. He states that the world is like a text that has to be interpreted proposing two main tools, deconstruction and double reading, to enable to see relationship between different interpretations in representation and construction of the world. R. Ashley`s work “Untrying the Sovereign State: A Double reading of Anarchy Problematique” is an example as these tools are implemented by postmodernist scholars. Specifically he uses double reading to analyse anarchy problematique, that is for him, from absence of global authority. Analysing the opposition between anarchy and sovereignty, he show the arbitrariness of traditional assumptions made by anarchy and the logic of state action, and, that, anarchy problematic only work with a certain assumption of that sovereign state as primary.
--
Problematizing sovereignty, states and violence, through genealogy and deconstruction, is central themes in postmodernism approach to international relations. Postmodernists review the structure of the sovereign state to explain how it is constituted as the normal mode of subjectivity in international relations. In his work, “Strategic Studies and World Order”, B.Klein explain the link violence and state, through genealogy. He argues that “states rely upon violence to constitute themselves as state”, so that, domestic space is distinguished by external one through violence and exclusion. The relation violence and political order it is also explained by Edkins in “Sovereign Power, Zone of Indistinction, and the Camp”. He argues that Nato refugee are as the Nazis ones because determined by a sovereign power seeking control over life.
--
Problematizing sovereignty and, above all, how it is produced and circulated, is a task developed by many as O Tuathail. In his works “Critical Geopolitics”, he thinks it is necessary to focus on boundaries to inquire state sovereignty. Boundaries, he states, separate interior sovereign space from an anarchical external one, not via a natural pre-political act, but via an act with political implications.
--
The theme of identity is also broad treated by postmodernist. Two contributions that explain relationship between state and identity recognizing that, the latter do not exist before the division of self and other, are the Dalby`s work “Geopolitical Discourse: the Soviet Union as Other” and Campbell`s work “Global Inscription: How Foreign Policy Constitutes the United States”. The former discusses the way in which the literature regarding nuclear deterrence during the early 1980s described and proscribed a particular geopolitical and representational relationship between the Soviet Union and the United States, in which the Soviet Union is demonized as the other. The latter argues that U.S. Foreign Policy has been important not only in its ability to 'secure' the United States from objective foreign enemies but also in its inability to define and eliminate domestic enemies as well. The concept of sovereignty and the concept connects, is, as showed above broadly treated by postmodernists To wide works in this direction are “A Genealogy of Sovereignty” of Bartelson and “Simulating Sovereignty: Intervention, the State and Symbolic Exchange” of Weber. They argue that sovereign-states are subject in process and not pre-given, so that the concept of sovereignty is historically variable.
--
Postmodernists argue that paradigm of sovereignty has restricted and decreased the comprehension of world politics. In order to rethink politics, they claim that the need to new conceptual language to overstep the terms of sovereign-state. Campbell in his work “Political prosaic, Transversal Politics and the Anarchical World” and Bleiker in “Popular Dissident, Human Agency And Global Politics”, use the concept of reterritorialization and deterriorialization to go beyond the paradigm of sovereignty, focusing on activities of modern political life and new political dynamic created by actors as refugees and immigrants as soon they encounter the sovereign-state. Critique of state sovereign and its ethical-political cost is provided by Walker in “Inside/Outside: international relations as political theory”. He argues that it is perplexing organize modern political life in terms of sovereign states and boundaries. That for him, can not be exclusive oppositions of inside and outside; identity can not be built on exclusion. Another work, in that direction, criticizing the connection between democracy and sovereignty is Connolly`s “Democracy and Territoriality”, in which he states that states sovereignty is compatible with democracy because pose too stringent limitation, stressing, in a global and transnational world, the necessity to an “ethos of democracy” that cross-cut territorial borders. The task to comprehend the meaning of ethics outside the sovereignty paradigm is offered by Ashley and Walker in “Speaking the Language of Exile: Dissidence in International Studies”. Their critique is direct to the faith invested in boundaries arguing that era ambiguous product. The state then postmodern ethics is universally flowing and not confined in territorial space.
--
3. Notes on Post-Modernism (by Mai Inoue)
--
At the end, here are some of the important points that postmodernism poses in the context of international relations.
Postmodernists argue that paradigm of sovereignty has restricted and decreased the comprehension of world politics. In order to rethink politics, they claim that the need to new conceptual language to overstep the terms of sovereign-state. Campbell in his work “Political prosaic, Transversal Politics and the Anarchical World” and Bleiker in “Popular Dissident, Human Agency And Global Politics”, use the concept of reterritorialization and deterriorialization to go beyond the paradigm of sovereignty, focusing on activities of modern political life and new political dynamic created by actors as refugees and immigrants as soon they encounter the sovereign-state. Critique of state sovereign and its ethical-political cost is provided by Walker in “Inside/Outside: international relations as political theory”. He argues that it is perplexing organize modern political life in terms of sovereign states and boundaries. That for him, can not be exclusive oppositions of inside and outside; identity can not be built on exclusion. Another work, in that direction, criticizing the connection between democracy and sovereignty is Connolly`s “Democracy and Territoriality”, in which he states that states sovereignty is compatible with democracy because pose too stringent limitation, stressing, in a global and transnational world, the necessity to an “ethos of democracy” that cross-cut territorial borders. The task to comprehend the meaning of ethics outside the sovereignty paradigm is offered by Ashley and Walker in “Speaking the Language of Exile: Dissidence in International Studies”. Their critique is direct to the faith invested in boundaries arguing that era ambiguous product. The state then postmodern ethics is universally flowing and not confined in territorial space.
--
3. Notes on Post-Modernism (by Mai Inoue)
--
At the end, here are some of the important points that postmodernism poses in the context of international relations.
--
First of all, postmodernism treats the production of knowledge “as a normative and political matter”and “power and knowledge are mutually supportive; they directly imply one another (Burchill,et al 182), while many scholarly studies imply that "the suspension of values, interests and power relations in the pursuit of objective knowledge" (182) is a precondition to explain the mechanism of the production of knowledge.
First of all, postmodernism treats the production of knowledge “as a normative and political matter”and “power and knowledge are mutually supportive; they directly imply one another (Burchill,et al 182), while many scholarly studies imply that "the suspension of values, interests and power relations in the pursuit of objective knowledge" (182) is a precondition to explain the mechanism of the production of knowledge.
--
Moreover, postmodernism emphasizes on human, sovereignty, and states. Ashley, one of the most well known postmodernists, believes that “ knowledge is thought to depend on the sovereignty of the heroic figure of reasoning man who knows that the order of the world is not God-given, that man is the origin of all knowledge, that responsibility for supplying meaning to history resides with man himself, and that, through reason, man may achieve total knowledge, total autonomy, and total power”(182). This is the main claim of postmodernism and is what separates this theory from previously developed theories. In this view, “the concept of state sovereignty depends not on the presence of a foundational political community but on practices of power-knowledge which help to constitute this apparent foundation”(183). In the context of international relations, the way postmodernism approaches to interdependent relations among states, sovereignty, and knowledge is entirely dissimilar because many other scholarly studies do not take the existence of politics into account.
Moreover, postmodernism emphasizes on human, sovereignty, and states. Ashley, one of the most well known postmodernists, believes that “ knowledge is thought to depend on the sovereignty of the heroic figure of reasoning man who knows that the order of the world is not God-given, that man is the origin of all knowledge, that responsibility for supplying meaning to history resides with man himself, and that, through reason, man may achieve total knowledge, total autonomy, and total power”(182). This is the main claim of postmodernism and is what separates this theory from previously developed theories. In this view, “the concept of state sovereignty depends not on the presence of a foundational political community but on practices of power-knowledge which help to constitute this apparent foundation”(183). In the context of international relations, the way postmodernism approaches to interdependent relations among states, sovereignty, and knowledge is entirely dissimilar because many other scholarly studies do not take the existence of politics into account.
--
Additionally, the importance of genealogy and deconstruction should be mentioned. Genealogy, in postmodernism's term, attempts to explain how and why history is taught. In this view, history “does not evidence a gradual discourse of truth and meaning” and “affirms the idea that all knowledge is situated in a particular time and place and issues from a particular perspective”(184). This clearly explains that history is always written from one particular person/being's point of view and passed on to people in order to legitimate the presence. For this, postmodernism sees that any perspectives, interpretations, objects, and events are to make up the real world. Postmodernism also points out the importance of deconstruction, which is to "radically unsettling what are taken to be stable concepts and conceptual oppositions" (186) because “[T]otalities, whether conceptual or social, are never fully present and properly established" (186).
Additionally, the importance of genealogy and deconstruction should be mentioned. Genealogy, in postmodernism's term, attempts to explain how and why history is taught. In this view, history “does not evidence a gradual discourse of truth and meaning” and “affirms the idea that all knowledge is situated in a particular time and place and issues from a particular perspective”(184). This clearly explains that history is always written from one particular person/being's point of view and passed on to people in order to legitimate the presence. For this, postmodernism sees that any perspectives, interpretations, objects, and events are to make up the real world. Postmodernism also points out the importance of deconstruction, which is to "radically unsettling what are taken to be stable concepts and conceptual oppositions" (186) because “[T]otalities, whether conceptual or social, are never fully present and properly established" (186).
--
Even though postmodernism sees that everything is constructed, this theory views that violence can become the measurement to legitimate states and power, which is as one of the criticisms against postmodernism. In this view, violence is paradoxical, since violence can be either cure or poison, and states utilize violence as a tool to distinguish us from them. For instance, the use of violence is justified to protect us (self-defense purposes) even though violence jeopardizes and endangers them, which automatically creates and reinforces the idea of “we as a nation”. On the level of international relations, the presence of violence, militant power, for instance, validates and creates the idea of state. For this, postmodernism views that identity, territory, state, and nations are required to "disseminate and reinforce the supposition that political community must be understood and originated as a single identity perfectly aligned with and possessing its allocated territory"(194). To sum up, postmodernism views that everything within society – identity, territory, states, and what is believes to be real world – is always manipulated and created by states’ sovereignty and violence, for this, can be justified at times.
Even though postmodernism sees that everything is constructed, this theory views that violence can become the measurement to legitimate states and power, which is as one of the criticisms against postmodernism. In this view, violence is paradoxical, since violence can be either cure or poison, and states utilize violence as a tool to distinguish us from them. For instance, the use of violence is justified to protect us (self-defense purposes) even though violence jeopardizes and endangers them, which automatically creates and reinforces the idea of “we as a nation”. On the level of international relations, the presence of violence, militant power, for instance, validates and creates the idea of state. For this, postmodernism views that identity, territory, state, and nations are required to "disseminate and reinforce the supposition that political community must be understood and originated as a single identity perfectly aligned with and possessing its allocated territory"(194). To sum up, postmodernism views that everything within society – identity, territory, states, and what is believes to be real world – is always manipulated and created by states’ sovereignty and violence, for this, can be justified at times.
--
At the end, postmodernism has had an impact on contemporary social movements, such as the feminist movements, racial equality movements, gays and lesbian movements, peace movements, and anti-globalization movements, although not every single aspect of the theory is completely comprehended by the participants of these movements. However, it can be concluded that the critical thinking way of postmodernism is employed and adapted as a direction in many contemporary movements. Simultaneously, it should be noted that the complexity, vagueness, and unrealistic aspect of this theory have often been criticized by scholars and researchers. Postmodernism advocats, on the other hand, applause its very novel and unique way to approach to international relations and related issues.
--
Citation
--
At the end, postmodernism has had an impact on contemporary social movements, such as the feminist movements, racial equality movements, gays and lesbian movements, peace movements, and anti-globalization movements, although not every single aspect of the theory is completely comprehended by the participants of these movements. However, it can be concluded that the critical thinking way of postmodernism is employed and adapted as a direction in many contemporary movements. Simultaneously, it should be noted that the complexity, vagueness, and unrealistic aspect of this theory have often been criticized by scholars and researchers. Postmodernism advocats, on the other hand, applause its very novel and unique way to approach to international relations and related issues.
--
Citation
--
- Ashley, R. and Walker, R. B. J. “Speaking the Language of Exile: Dissidence in International Studies”, International Sudies Quasrterly, vol. 34, no. 3 (1990)
- Ashley, R. “The Geopolitics of Geopolitical space: toward a critical social theory of International Politics”, Alternatives, 12 (1987)
- Ashley, R. “Untrying the Sovereign State: A Double readig of Anrachy Problematique”, Millennium, vol.17, no. 2 (1988)
- Bartelson, J. A Genealogy of Sovereignty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (1995)
- Bleiker, R. “Popular Dissident, Human Agency And Global Politics” Cambridge (2000)
- Connolly, W. “ Democracy and Territoriality”, Millennium, vol. 20, no.3, (1991)
Focault, M. Dishpline and Punish , Harmondsworth (1977) - Campbell, D. “National Deconstrution: Violence, Identity, and Justice in Bosnia”, Minneapolis (1998)
- Campbell, D. “Political prosaic, Transversal Politics and the Anarchical World” Minneapolis (1996)
- Campbell, D. 'Global Inscription: How Foreign Policy Constitutes the United States.' Alternatives, vol.15 (1990)
- Dalby, S.“Geopolitical Discourse: the Soviet Union as Other” , Alternatives, vol. 13 (1988)
- Derrida, J. “Of Grammatology”, Baltimore (1978)
- Edkins, J. “Soverig Power, Zone of Indistinction, and the Camp”, Alternatives, vol.25, no. 1 (2000)
- Klein, B. “Strategic Studies and World Order: The Global Politics of Deterrence , Cambridge (1994)
- O Tuathail, G. “Critical Geopolitics: The Politics of Identity” , Minneapois (1992)
- Walker, R. J. B. “Inside/Outside: international relations as political theory” Cambridge (1993)
- Weber, C. “Simulating Sovereignity: Intervention, the State and Symbolic Exchange”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (1995)
