STV Sovereignty: An overview 2. Sovereignty in the modern age

Transcription

1 STV4109 OVERVIEW OF LECTUR ES & LITER ATURE Except for book chapters, you can access, download and print all of the articles on the reading list if you have access to the University s network. Some recommended articles might be added before the course starts. For certain course assignments, you also need to find additional literature of your own choosing. Introduction 1. Sovereignty: An overview This lecture concerns sovereignty as a key concept in international/political thought and outlines contemporary debates over sovereignty. The lecture also overviews the substantive and procedurial structure of the course. Dan Philpott, Sovereignty, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2010, (ca 10 p.) George Pavlich and Charles Barbour, Introduction, in After Sovereignty: On the Question of Political Beginnings, ed. George Pavlich and Charles Barbour (Routledge, n.d.), Yale H. Ferguson & Richard W. Mansbach, The myths of state sovereignty, Bologna Center Journal of International Affairs, Sovereignty in the modern age While the course as such is not primarily concerned with the history of sovereignty, this lecture gives an overview over the political thought and the political reality of sovereignty in the modern era. Robert Jackson, Sovereignty and its Presuppositions: Before 9/11 and After, Political Studies 55, no. 2 (6, 2007): Christopher Rudolph, Sovereignty and Territorial Borders in a Global Age, International Studies Review 7, no. 1 (3, 2005): Hendrik Spruyt, The origins, development, and possible decline of the modern state, Annual Review of Political Science 5, no. 1 (6, 2002): Turan Kayaoglu, The extension of Westphalian sovereignty: State building and the abolition of extraterritoriality, International Studies Quarterly 51, no. 3 (2007): Hidemi Suganami, Understanding sovereignty through Kelsen/Schmitt, Review of International Studies 33, no. 03 (7, 2007): 511. Eiki Berg and Ene Kuusk, What makes sovereignty a relative concept? Empirical approaches to international society, Political Geography 29, no. 1 (1, 2010):

2 Globalisation, states and sovereignty 3. Critics of (the critics of) sovereignty In this lecture, we discuss two recurring, influential critiques of sovereignty: Realists who argue that the idea of an international order based on the norm of sovereignty is but organised hypocrisy and idealist critics who, to the contrary, see sovereignty as a concession to crude power politics. We shall also consider those who, from various positions, defend sovereignty against either or both strands of critique. Stephen D. Krasner, Compromising Westphalia, International Security 20, no. 3 (1995): Cohen, Jean L. Whose sovereignty? Empire versus international law. Ethics & International Affairs 18, no. 3 (2004): Seyla Benhabib, Twilight of sovereignty or the emergence of cosmopolitan norms? Rethinking citizenship in volatile times, Citizenship Studies 11, no. 1 (2007): David Chandler, Conclusion: 'The flight from sovereignty', in Hollow hegemony: Rethinking global politics, power and resistance (London: Pluto Press, 2009), David Held, Law of peoples, law of states, Legal theory 8, no. 2 (2002). Cohen, Jean L. Sovereign equality vs. imperial right: The battle over the New World Order. Constellations 13, no. 4 (2006): David Chandler, New rights for old? Cosmopolitan citizenship and the critique of state sovereignty, Political Studies 51, no. 2 (2003): Saskia Sassen, Neither global nor national: novel assemblages of territory, authority and rights, Ethics & Global Politics 1, no. 0 (1, 2008). 4. Globalisation theory and its discontents Much of the recent normative interest in state sovereignty in recent years falls back on the empirical premise that globalisation has rendered the sovereign nation-state obsolete, and with it, the principles of world order established in 1648 or In this lecture, we shall focus on the critics of globalisation theory, who argue that the rumours of the death of the modern, sovereign state are greatly exaggerated. Omar Dahbour, Advocating sovereignty in an age of globalization, Journal of Social Philosophy 37, no. 1 (2006): Rosenberg, Justin. Globalization theory: A post mortem. International Politics 42, no. 1 (2005): P. Hirst and G. Thompson, The Future of Globalization, Cooperation and Conflict 37, no. 3 (9, 2002): Thompson, Helen. The modern state and its adversaries. Government and Opposition 41, no. 1 (2006):

3 National: The democratic constitution 5. Justifying the demos: Constituting the democratic sovereign Democracy means rule by the people, and traditionally, democratic theorists have focused on what this rule thing should mean, while neglecting the other half of the term: the people supposed to rule itself. How can the people democratically constitute itself? Justifying the demos is not just a theoretical matter, but has implications for tricky political questions such as secession, border control, international authority, and the right to vote. In this lecture, we ll discuss recent attempts at justifying the popular sovereign. Abizadeh, Arash. Democratic theory and border coercion: No right to unilaterally control your own borders. Political Theory 36, no. 1 (2008): Näsström, Sofia. What globalization overshadows. Political Theory 31, no. 6 (2003): Moore, Margaret. Cosmopolitanism and political communities. Social Theory and Practice 32, no. 4 (2006): Claudio López-Guerra, Should expatriates vote?, Journal of Political Philosophy 13, no. 2 (2005): Agné, Hans. A dogma of democratic theory and globalization: Why politics need not include everyone it affects. European Journal of International Relations 12, no. 3 (2006): Constraining the demos: Human rights and popular sovereignty Since the Enlightenment, democratic theorists have debated how to find the proper balance between popular sovereignty and the individual autonomy. In current debate, this old puzzle recurs in new shape in the problem of justifying, for instance, international human rights courts, which exercise an increasingly independent jurisdiction over sovereign states, including democracies. Jürgen Habermas, Constitutional democracy - A paradoxical union of contradictory principles?, Political Theory 29, no. 6 (2001): James D. Ingram, Of sweatshops and subsistence: Habermas on human rights, Ethics & Global Politics 2, no. 3 (2009): Todd Hedrick, Constitutionalization and democratization: Habermas on postnational governance, Social Theory and Practice 33, no. 3 (2007): Michael Goodhart, Human Rights and Global Democracy, Ethics & International Affairs 22, no. 4 (12, 2008): Alex Gourevitch, Are Human Rights Liberal?, Journal of Human Rights 8, no. 4 (10, 2009): Kenneth Baynes, Discourse ethics and the political conception of human rights, Ethics & Global Politics 2, no. 1 (3, 2009).

4 J. L. Cohen, Rethinking Human Rights, Democracy, and Sovereignty in the Age of Globalization, Political Theory 36, no. 4 (5, 2008): Matthew S. Weinert, Bridging the human rights-sovereignty divide: Theoretical foundations of a democratic sovereignty, Human Rights Review 8, no. 2 (2007): J. Donald Moon, Rawls and Habermas on Public Reason: Human Rights and Global Justice, Annual Review of Political Science 6 (2003): International: Constraining sovereignty from the outside 7. International legitimacy Allegedly, an ever growing number of international institutions exercise an increasing authority over states and other actors in international politics. Some claim that such institutions, though they provide benefits states cannot otherwise obtain, increasingly face a legitimacy problem. Especially so, since on the one hand traditional sources of legitimacy, such as state consent, are deemed increasingly inappropriate, while on the other hand, few seem to think global justice or democracy to be a feasible anti-dote. Here, we shall address the nature of legitimacy problems in international institutions and critically discuss normative theories of international legitimacy in the light of positive IR theory. Ian Clark, Legitimacy in a global order, Review of International Studies 29, no. 1 (3, 2004). Buchanan, Allen, and Robert O. Keohane. The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions. Ethics & International Affairs 20, no. 4 (2006): Hurd, I. Legitimacy and authority in international politics. International Organization 53, no. 2 (1999): Zürn, Michael. Global governance and legitimacy problems. Government and Opposition 39, no. 2 (2004): Caney, Simon. The responsibilities and legitimacy of economic international institutions. In Legitimacy, justice and public international law, edited by Lukas H. Meyer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Keohane, Robert O., Stephen Macedo, and Andrew Moravcsik. Democracy-Enhancing Multilateralism. International Organization 63, no. 01 (2009): 1. David A. Lake, Delegating divisible sovereignty: Sweeping a conceptual minefield, The Review of International Organizations 2, no. 3 (3, 2007): The federal-republican alternative Traditionally opposed to sovereignty, the republican-federal tradition has sought to constrain power by means of checks and balances on power, both horizontally and vertically, both domestically and internationally. In recent years, this republican tradition has achieved a second spring, both in normative political philosophy and in positive international theory. In this lecture, we ll discuss the challenges that this tradition poses to established concepts of sovereignty. Deudney, D. Geopolitics as Theory: Historical Security Materialism. European Journal of International Relations 6, no. 1 (3, 2000):

5 . Publius before Kant: Federal-republican security and democratic peace. European Journal of International Relations 10, no. 3 (2004): Pettit, P. A Republican Law of Peoples. European Journal of Political Theory 9, no. 1 (1, 2010): Patrick Riley, The origins of federal theory in international relations ideas, Polity 6, no. 1 (1973): Long, Katya. The anti Hobbes? Montesquieu s contribution to International Relations Theory. In-Spire: Journal of Law, Politics and Societies 3, no. 2 (2008): Global: The cosmopolitan turn 9. No justice without a state: Cosmopolitanism and global justice Does morality require a state? A key debate in political philosophy over the past decade has concerned whether we owe moral duties to all human beings everywhere, rather than just to our next of kin or our compatriots. A key issue of contention is whether moral obligations presuppose any institutional hardware a state and if so, whether that institutional hardware exists at a global level. In this lecture, we shall address the key positions in what some have seen as a general cosmopolitan turn in political philosophy. Required (66) Sangiovanni, Andrea. Global justice, reciprocity, and the state. Philosophy & Public Affairs 35, no. 1 (2007): Miller, David. Cosmopolitanism: a critique. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 5, no. 3 (2002): Joshua Cohen and Charles Sabel, Extra Rempublicam Nulla Justitia?, Philosophy & Public Affairs 34, no. 2 (3, 2006): Amartya Sen, What do we want from a theory of justice?, Journal of Philosophy 103, no. 5 (2006): Thomas W. Pogge, Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty, Ethics 103, no. 1 (1992): Global democracy: The third transformation Parallelling the cosmopolitan turn in moral philosophy, and drawing on theoretical strands we have covered earlier in the course, democratic theorists have debated whether democracy today ought to be organised at the global, transnational level. Some theorists seek to extend established models and elements of democracy from the nation-state level to the global level, while others remain critical. Kok-Chor Tan, Global democracy: International, not cosmopolitan, in Democracy in a global world: Human rights and political participation in the 21st century (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2008), Robert E. Goodin, Global democracy: in the beginning, International Theory 2, no. 02 (2010):

6 Hans Agné, Why democracy must be global: self-founding and democratic intervention, International Theory 2, no. 03 (2010): Takeshi Nagano, A critique of Held's cosmopolitan democracy, Contemporary Political Theory 5, no. 1 (2006): Hauke Brunkhorst, Globalising democracy without a state: Weak public, strong public, global constitutionalism, Millenium: Journal of International Studies 31, no. 3 (2002): William E. Scheuerman, Global governance without global government? Habermas on postnational democracy, Political Theory 36, no. 1 (2008): L. Cabrera, Review article: World government: Renewed debate, persistent challenges, European Journal of International Relations 16, no. 3 (5, 2010): Carol C. Gould, Self-determination beyond sovereignty: Relating transnational democracy to local autonomy, Journal of Social Philosophy 37, no. 1 (2006):