Academic literature on the topic 'Feminist theories of international relations'

AbstractFeminist International Relations (IR) theory is haunted by a radical feminist ghost. From Enloe's suggestion that the personal is both political and international, often seen as the foundation of feminist IR, feminist IR scholarship has been built on the intellectual contributions of a body of theory it has long left for dead. Though Enloe's sentiment directly references the Hanisch's radical feminist rallying call, there is little direct engagement with the radical feminist thinkers who popularised the sentiment in IR. Rather, since its inception, the field has been built on radical feminist thought it has left for dead. This has left feminist IR troubled by its radical feminist roots and the conceptual baggage that feminist IR has unreflectively carried from second-wave feminism into its contemporary scholarship. By returning to the roots of radical feminism we believe IR can gain valuable insights regarding the system of sex-class oppression, the central role of heterosexuality in maintaining this system, and the feminist case for revolutionary political action in order to dismantle it.

This study deals with the Feminist challenge to the Mainstream International Relations Discipline (IR) - rationalist theories, especially Realism - and the mainstream's responses to this challenge. It addresses the issue in five steps. Firstly, it sheds light on how Feminism is related to International Relations. Secondly, it examines how Feminist IR theorists criticize the Mainstream IR due to its state-centric approach and argue that being obsessed with anarchic international system prevented analysis of social relations, including gender relations. Thirdly, the study addresses how Feminism exposes the gender biases in central terms such as power, autonomy, rationality, security, and state. Fourthly, it examines how Feminist writing on IR challenges the dichotomies of the Mainstream IR. Fifthly, the study examines how the Mainstream has responded to that challenge. The conclusion argues that although Feminist challenge to mainstream IR cannot be deemed successful in reconstructing IR, Feminism still enriches our understanding of global politics.

The growth of Feminism which has given rise to a new study in the International Relations (IR) field is worth to follow. Not only since it is able to contribute to the academic discipline of IR in theoretically challenging the traditional approach to understand the world politics, but also since it is able to contribute practically because of its nature as a socio-political movement. Nevertheless, in the IR itself there is always a question concerning the possibility of Feminism to be considered a mainstream theory. This article tries to discuss the theoretical contribution of, as well as some issues followed, the development of Feminism in the study of international relations all this time. It finally argues that Feminism can be considered a mainstream theory of international relations so long as there are conversations between traditional theories of international relations and feminists theories of international relations. Keywords: Feminism, International Relations, mainstream theory Abstrak Perkembangan Feminisme yang telah melahirkan suatu kajian baru dalam ilmu Hubungan Internasional (HI) layak untuk disimak. Tak hanya karena ia mampu menyumbang secara teoritis kepada disipilin ilmu HI dalam menantang pendekatan tradisional untuk memahami politik dunia, tetapi juga karena ia mampu menyumbang secara praktis mengingat bahwa sejatinya ia merupakan sebuah gerakan sosial-politis. Meski demikian, dalam HI sendiri selalu ada pertanyaan mengenai peluang Feminisme untuk diterima sebagai sebuah teori yang lazim. Tulisan ini mencoba mendiskusikan sumbangan teoritis dari, sekaligus perdebatan-perdebatan yang mengikuti, perkembangan Feminisme dalam kajian hubungan internasional selama ini. Argumen yang dibangun pada akhirnya ialah bahwa Feminisme dapat dianggap sebagai sebuah teori tentang hubungan internasional yang lazim sepanjang terdapat percakapan antara teori tentang hubungan internasional tradisional dan teori feminis tentang hubungan internasional. Kata kunci: Feminisme, Hubungan Internasional, teori mainstream

The paper analyses the general features of the ongoing debate within the feminist approach to the International Relations studies with the aim to discover whether its proponents continue to tear down the traditional norms of this academic discipline at the beginning of the 21st century, to give innovative insights, and to illuminate the power structure hidden in the so-called ?mainstream? IR theories. The paper discusses the most important feminist research questions and topics of the day, the basic feminist argumentation and its genesis, and stresses internal disagreements and criticism towards some theoretical standpoints within the feminist branch of the International Relations discipline. The analysis focuses on research articles and books published in the period 2001-2016 and primarily in the United States and the United Kingdom - the countries where feminist academia is fairly developed in the discipline of International Relations. The author concludes that despite the influence strengthened by the increased number of published research papers, books, and collections of papers in the early 21st century, the proponents of feminist IR theories continue to struggle for their ?place under the Sun? within the mainstream of the International Relations academic community. The epistemological contribution of feminist theories to the International Relations discipline is best seen in regard to their dissident innovations, which ?soften? the traditionally rigid framework of mainstream theory by expanding the list of legitimate research topics and introducing postpositive methodological approaches and techniques.

Are women's movement and feminist theories still connected to radical politics and the interest in changing social inequalities, when feminism has been `institutionalized', for instance in the academia, and has become a mainstreaming issue in social policies? This main question was put to eminent feminist scholars, with the aim of investigating the renewed critical role of international feminism and women's/gender studies in society, science, information, education and research. A reconstruction of the main changes which have occurred to women's movements and feminist theories in the last decades were the core of the interview, stressing differences and disagreement, also in relation to the new sociopolitical claims, supported by younger generations. The conclusion was that feminism has not lost its historical political mission, even though the world scenario and ideologies have dramatically changed. Indeed, feminism has become transcultural and `glocal', facing new socioeconomic inequities induced by globalization both in western societies and countries in development, confronting with the transformation of collective/gender identities and questioning the increasing importance of (bio)technologies.

The development of feminist jurisprudence in recent years has made a rich and fruitful contribution to legal theory. Few areas of domestic law have avoided the scrutiny of feminist writers, who have exposed the gender bias of apparently neutral systems of rules. A central feature of many western theories about law is that the law is an autonomous entity, distinct from the society it regulates. A legal system is regarded as different from a political or economic system, for example, because it operates on the basis of abstract rationality, and is thus universally applicable and capable of achieving neutrality and objectivity. These attributes are held to give the law its special authority. More radical theories have challenged this abstract rationalism, arguing that legal analysis cannot be separated from the political, economic, historical and cultural context in which people live. Some theorists argue that the law functions as a system of beliefs that make social, political and economic inequalities appear natural. Feminist jurisprudence builds on certain aspects of this critical strain in legal thought. It is much more focused and concrete, however, and derives its theoretical force from immediate experience of the role of the legal system in creating and perpetuating the unequal position of women.

ABSTRACTAll critical theories lay claim to some kind of account not only of the present of international politics and its relation to possible futures, but also of the role of critical theory in the present and future in international politics. This article argues that if critical international theory is to have a future that lives up to its revolutionary ambition, then it needs to listen more carefully to the voices of postcolonial and feminist critics and take on board the heterotemporality of international politics.

In her recent book published after the election of Donald Trump as the US President in 2016, Cynthia Enloe argues that the patriarchy, similar to our smart phones, has updated itself as a reaction against the achievements of the second and third wave feminisms. The updated patriarchy has this time renewed itself through the beliefs and values about the ways the world works (2017). The competing foreign policies representing the hypermasculine hegemonic masculinity of the current world politics and its authoritarian leaders are the outputs of this new updated version of patriarchy. Enloe doubts that having gained sustainability with its updates, the patriarchy could be fought against simply with street demonstrations, as it was before. The patriarchy could be forced to retreat only by incessantly asking “curious” feminist questions that would expose all masculine patterns of life (2017). Continuously asking questions without giving up or giving in would make the patriarchy transparent and vulnerable. In the face of curious, non-stop questions from a gender perspective and the conscious use of the terms supporting gender equality, the patriarchy, albeit updated and sustained, does not stand a chance. Enloe explains the reason why incorporating gender in International Relations has been considered irrelevant by the power- and security dominated character of the discipline. Also, because the heavy majority of the academics associated with International Relations are male, it is them who choose what is important and worthy of ‘serious’ investigation (Enloe, 2004, 96). This masculine attitude, however, has been clearly excluding multiple human experiences and hindering their capacity to create new possibilities for peaceful co-existence in international relations (Youngs, 2004). As a matter of fact, when we look at the emergence of International Relations as a separate discipline, and the political theories that it takes as its first point of reference, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen) – the human rights document at the time of the French Revolution – Machiavelli’s The Prince; and Man, the State and War, written in 1959 by Kenneth Waltz, the founder of neo-realism, were the mainstream writings that brought liberal (libertarian) and realist perspectives to the discipline of International Relations, respectively. The fundamental aim of these texts was, in fact, to make an analysis based on history and ‘his’ problems. Although these texts put forward a desire for rights and freedoms, as well as the achievement of peace, these values are mostly targeted towards men. Thus, over time, the prominent concepts of International Relations, such as security and hegemony, were defined from a masculine and patriarchal perspective. For instance, from the theoretical view of realists, hegemony is attributed to the order established and led by the most powerful state of the international system– both militarily and economically– while sovereignty evokes the Hobbesian Leviathan (the Devil), with its masculine nature and might. Raewyn Connell responds to these masculine conceptualizations by pointing out that hegemony includes organized social domination in all spheres of life, from religious doctrines to mundane practice, from mass media to taxation (1998: 246). As Connell reminds us, “hegemonic masculinity” expresses the domination of men over women intellectually, culturally, socially, or even politically, thus establishing an unequivocal linkage between gender and power (Connell, 1998). Just as the Western approach to reading and identifying the East and its fiction found an answer in Edward Said’s critique of Orientalism, the theory of political realism put forth by Hans Morgenthau was criticized by Ann Tickner for conceptualizing international politics through the lens of an assumed masculine subject (Tür & Koyuncu, 2010: 9). Critical theory and postmodernism, as alternative approaches in International Relations, drew attention to the otherization of different geographies, civilizations and identities. Yet, on the issue of gender equality, the otherization of women has not been sufficiently recognized; the superiority of man and patriarchy is made possible through the othering of women. From this point of view, it would be beneficial to make a holistic reading of the International Relations literature, and to dismantle these masculine concepts by asking “curious” questions of the discipline. In Terrell Carver’s words, “Gendering IR” is...a project; “gendered” IR is an outcome” (Carver, 2003: 289). In order to achieve such outcome, it bears utmost importance for the gender-equality advocates to insist on, institutionally and practically, gender-based approaches and to not agree with the priority list of the masculine agenda. Security, order, control and retaliation increasingly dominate the discourse shaping the world politics. The gender perspective in International Relations develops to create alternative paradigms that would break this vicious circle of (in)security. Feminist theory in International Relations has demonstrated significant progress since the 1990s and opened pathways in an uncharted territory. Cynthia Enloe, Ann Tickner, Spike V. Peterson and Christine Sylvester, among others, are the most prominent forerunners of this field. Through their works, feminist theory has adopted a perspective critical of the masculinity and the masculine values of international politics by taking not only ‘women’ but a wider category of gender into its centre. These feminist scholars have deconstructed International Relations theories by posing gender-related questions and displayed the masculine prejudice embedded in the definitions of security, power and sovereignty. The feminist theories of International Relations have thus distinguished themselves from the other theories of the discipline by paying a ‘curious’ attention to the power hierarchies and relation structures through inclusiveness and self-reflexivity (True, 2017: 3). As Cynthia Enloe puts it, the gender perspective in International Relations must first be guided by a feminist consciousness (2004: 97). The feminist International Relations, however, although more than a quarter of century has passed since its emergence, are still struggling with the masculine theories to be considered as an equally legitimate way of understanding how the world works. Various epistemological, ontological and ethical debates may have enriched the field (True, 2017: 1), but at the same time, too many as they are, such debates may paradoxically be accusing the spreading-thin of the gender coalition. The capacity of the feminist International Relations’ ethical principles to participate in the global politics has been limited to the United Nations Security Council’s decision number 1325 and the Swedish feminist foreign policy. The feminist attempt to facilitate substantial change and interaction by creating a normative agenda has been called ‘normative feminism’ by Jacqui True (2013: 242). Normative feminism is a project of institutionalising gender in foreign policy by focusing on socio-economic and political changes. The special issue here is our attempt to partake in this project of change in international relations. We have aimed to enhance the visibility of the gender norms of behavior and decision-making with the presupposition that they would pose an alternative to the masculine norms in International Relations by better supporting the human priorities of peace and co-existence. Adopting Judith Butler’s notion of performativity, the feminist existence in international politics has an undeniable connection to engaging in continuous activities. As Rihannan Bury suggests, “what gives a community its substance is the consistent repetition of these ‘various acts’ by a majority of members.” “Being a member of community,” therefore, “is not something one is but something one does” (2005: 14). In Turkey, too, in order to challenge the recognition of the ‘hyper’ version of the hegemonic masculinity as the only viable world view, gender-charged normative discourses, interactions and agendas must be continuously created and multiplied. We hope that the Turkish literature-review and the articles published here will serve this purpose. As is the situation in all disciplines, the feminist International Relations has nurtured many onto-epistemologies, some in competition with one another. Such multitude, though definitely a richness, has been challenging the feminist stance’s capacity to stand united against the hypermasculine hegemonic masculinity. In her latest book, Enloe calls for a continuous struggle of a new and wider feminist coalition against the updated authoritarianism of the patriarchy –inspiring our title “Don’t Give Up! Don’t Give In!.” Such expanded coalition could rise on the common purpose of fighting male dominance and ignore the differences of discourse created by the debate on identity. The gender-guided change and transformation desired in international politics could be achieved more easily in this way (Hemmings, 2012: 148, 155). On this account, in parallel with Enloe’s proposal of establishing a wider consensus simply on peace and co-existence (2017), a new era, in which questions of identity will, for some time, not be asked, may be dawning. A grand coalition of consensus has better chance of resisting the authoritarian leaders of hyper hegemonic masculinity. Our special issue of Gender and International Relations opens with a Turkish literature review with the aim of introducing the topic to Turkish readers. Çiçek Coşkun, against a historical background, presents some of the prominent feminist scholars who have left their footprints in this very masculine area with their fresh gender perspectives. In doing that she offers us a comparative framework in which works by the Turkish and international scholars could be assessed simultaneously. Nezahat Doğan’s article seeks to establish the relation between global peace and gender by using the data obtained from the Global Peace Index, Gender Inequality Index and Social Institutions and Gender Index. In this way, adopting a currently trendy approach, Doğan investigates the interaction between gender and International Relations through a quantitative method. Zehra Yılmaz’s article discusses the temporary position of Syrian women asylum seekers in Turkey from the perspective of the post-colonial feminist concept of subaltern. The article aims to combine feminist migration studies and post-colonial feminist literature within the context of International Relations. Sinem Bal’s article questions whether the EU has designed its gender policies as an aspect of the human-right norms of the European integration or as a way to regulate market economy. Bal pursues such questioning through the reading of the official documents of the EU that prescribes what Europeanization is for Turkey. Thus, all articles constitute a well-rounded understanding of what gendered approaches can achieve in the current practice of international studies. The co-authored article written by Bezen Balamir-Coşkun and Selin Akyüz examined how the images of women leaders in international politics were presented in the international media. The selected images the three most powerful women political leaders list of Forbes in 2017 –Angela Merkel, Theresa May and Federica Mogherini were analysed in the light of the political masculinities literature from a social visual semiotics perspective. It is believed that such an analysis will contribute to the debates about gendered aspect of international relations as well as the current debates on political masculinities. Gizem Bilgin-Aytaç points out that the global policy that emerged after the Cold War and the emergence of the new way of approaching the IR from a feminist perspective have improved the scope of conceptual analysis in peace theories as well. Bilgin-Aytaç discusses global peace conditions with a gender perspective - in particular, referring to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, with a focus on exemplary contemporary issues. Fulden İbrahimhakkıoğlu, in her article, discusses the debate between Ukraine-based feminist group FEMEN staged several protests in support of Amina Tyler, a Tunisian FEMEN activist receiving death threats for posting nude photographs of herself online with social messages written on her body and the Muslim Women Against FEMEN who released an open letter criticizing the discourse FEMEN used in these protests, which they found to be white colonialist and Islamophobic. Thus, İbrahimhakkıoğlu aimes to examines the discursive strategies put forth by the two sides of the very debate, and unveiling the shortcomings of liberalism as drawn on by both positions, the author attempts to rethink what “freedom” might mean for international feminist alliances across differences.

The notion of reparations encompasses debates about the relationship between individual and society, the nature of political community, the meaning of justice, and the impact of rights on social change. In international law, the dominant approach to reparations is based on individual rights. This normative framework is out of step with the understanding of reparations circulating among many women activists. I develop a theoretical approach to justice and reparations that helps to explain the gap between the international normative framework and activist discourses. Based on distributive, communitarian, and critical theories of justice, I argue that reparations can be thought of as rights, symbols, or processes. Understanding reparations as either rights or symbols is rife with problems when approached from an activist and feminist theoretical standpoint. As decisions about reparations programs are and should be determined by the political, social, economic, and cultural context, a blueprint for ‘a feminist reparations program’ is impractical and ill-advised. However, the strongest feminist approach to reparations would depart from an understanding of reparations as a process.La notion de réparations tient compte des relations entre l’individu et la société, de la nature du politique, de la signification de la justice et de l’incidence des droits dans le changement social. En droit international, l’idée dominante à cet égard est fondée sur les droits individuels. Ce cadre normatif est en décalage avec l’idée que de nombreuses militantes se font des réparations. J’ai élaboré une façon théorique de voir la justice et les réparations qui aide à expliquer l’écart entre le cadre normatif international et le discours militant. Selon cette approche fondée sur des théories distributives, communautaires et critiques de la justice, j’affirme que les réparations peuvent être vues comme des droits, des symboles ou des processus. D’un point de vue théorique militant ou féministe, le fait de considérer les réparations comme des droits ou des symboles s’accompagne de nombreux problèmes. Étant donné que les décisions au sujet des programmes de réparations sont et doivent être déterminés en fonction du contexte politique, social, économique et culturel, la conception d’un programme de réparations féministe est peu pratique et mal avisée. Toutefois, la meilleure approche féministe face aux réparations s’écarterait de la vision selon laquelle celles-ci constituent un processus.

Abstract This brief introduction elaborates on Marysia Zalewski's significant body of work over the past three decades, which provides not only ample evidence of the benefits of feminist modes of encountering world politics, but also a robust framework for enquiry for scholars of politics and international relations. Her work, while deeply rooted in feminist theories and practice, has implications which go far beyond disciplinary determinations and touch upon, as the symposium demonstrates, the empirics, and the impact of international politics writ large, from finance to terrorism to violence.

Feminist theories of international relations traditionally criticize realism as a representative of masculine values in the international relations. According to the feministic premises, the Czech foreign policy should be highly masculinises in the way of realistic discourse because of very low representation of women in foreign policy processes in the Czech Republic. The aim of this thesis is to analyse feminisation and masculinisation of the Czech foreign policy in cases of three events -- the terroristic attacks from September 11, 2001, Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. This thesis points out the plurality of masculine and feminine values. From that reason it is not possible to adapt feminist critic of realism to the Czech foreign policy. The masculine values of the Czech foreign policy are determined more by the liberal constructivism.

Thesis is focusing on the analysis of the situation in Syria in the period since 2011 till present times. First part will present main theoretical thoughts on the international security such as Realist school, Liberalist school, Human and Collective security concepts and the most modern theoretical school of security- Copenhagen school. That was done in case to have a clear notion of the international security development and to chose the one theory which will reflect the best the situation in Syria. In the practical part I analyzing the actions and inter actions of the main international security actors, such as United Nations plus important actors in the region of the Middle East -- Arab League, and of course Syrian government and opposition. Also I will try to apply Copenhagen school of Security on the Syrian situation and to find out if that theory is good or not for that kind of analysis. After browsing actions taken by actors and opposition in the conclusion I found out that nowadays international security system cannot be called very successful and that Copenhagen school of Security its good explanatory theory but it pretty useless in case of conflict resolution.

ABSTRACT INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY AND THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OF THE MIDDLE EAST: A STATE OF THE FIELD STUDY Tekelioglu, Ahmet Selim M.Sc., Department of International Relations Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Meliha AltuniSik January 2009, 82 pages This thesis analyzes the level of interaction between International Relations theories and the literature on the international relations of the Middle East. The disciplines- area studies controversy is analyzed in a way to account for the low level of cooperation between International Relations as an academic discipline and Middle East studies. The thesis looks into the literature in order to demonstrate to what extent developments in International Relations theories informed the study of the international relations of the Middle East. The thesis emphasizes the need for a normative/ critical aprroach in order to overcome the bridge beween these fields caused by epistemological and methodological as well as by the political economy of scholarship informed by ideological rivalries.

The Russian Federation claims the 2014 Crimea reunification is legal. Ukraine, together with NATO countries and others, deems the annexation illegal. Both states agree on most of the facts, with a few significant exceptions, and both states argue their case in terms of international law, on which they both generally agree. Hence, what is the point of international law? Does it have a discernible and independent effect on international politics? If so, is it in principle possible to observe it? This work attempts to be an analysis of these questions in the reunification/annexation of Crimea by Russia of 2014, to see whether an answer can in fact be given. The aim is to address the position of the Russian legal arguments within current international law, together with its implications for two of the currently most credited theories of international politics.
Arts, Faculty of
Political Science, Department of
Graduate

[From the introduction]; This thesis has three interlocking aims. The first is to examine the extension in recent decades of feminist theory to International Relations. The second is to consider the challenge of some leading non-Western feminist thinkers to key assumptions about International Relations made by Western thinkers. The third objective is to consider the implications of feminist theory for political practice. This is achieved through an examination of the recent attempt by the United States to implement a female emancipation project based on Western universal values, in Afghanistan.

This study uses Kenneth Burke's concept of terministic filters to examine what the word security means to two different publics within the academic discipline of international relations. It studies the rhetoric feminist international relations theorists and contrasts their view security with that of realist and neo-realist interpretations of international affairs. This study claims to open up the possibility for studying the rhetoric of emergent movements through the use of dramatistic or terministic screens.

This paper is divided into four chapters. The first one examines the shift in policies from Nasser to Sadat paying close attention to the effects on women. It contextualizes the space in which Islamic movements would come about. The second chapter traces the historical role of women in nationalist projects. It also looks at historical tensions between secular and Islamic women. Then the paper surveys the demographics of Islamic movement and the role of women within four parts of it: the Muslim Brotherhood, the Jama‘at, local mosque communities, and charity work. The third chapter then reviews liberal feminist critique of Islamic female activism. This critique is divided into three sections: tradition v. modernity, patriarchy in Islam, and the veil. The chapter then looks at three problems (universality, lack of context, and positionality) with this critique and briefly looks at the material consequences of such an 4 approach. The fourth chapter gives a background of postcolonialism, applies it to Islamic female activism, and demonstrates why it is crucial to work within a postcolonial framework.

The objective of this study is to give an overview of existing theories for analyzing the behavior of sandwich beams and plates and to develop an approach for evaluating their behavior under dynamic loading. The dispersion relations for harmonic wave propagation through sandwich structures are shown to be a sound basis for evaluating whether the individual layers are modeled properly. The results provide a guide in the selection of existing models or the development of new models.

The calculations of boundary problems by different plasticity theories give different results for many applied problems. One of these reasons is complex loading. Because, calculation of structures and installations which operate under plastic strain conditions, have been done on the basis of simplified stress-strain constraints. Besides, overwhelming majority of structures usually operates under complex multiparametric loading conditions, it is necessary to look for the ways of stating boundary problems of the bodies’ stability and plastic yielding on the basis of experimentally and theoretically substantiated stress-strain correlations. It is a complex problem including the following: comprehensive investigation of material properties; modelling of constitutive relations taking into consideration the experimental investigations of the materials; formulation of numerical approach in combination with new physical correlations.