The state of the art of the English School

Publisher PD

Of nomads and khanates : heteronomy and interpolity order in 19th-century Central Asia

Scholars of International Relations (IR) and Global Historical Sociology alike have recently become more and more interested in Eurasian order(s). Yet, most recent works on Eurasian historical international relations approach the subject from a long durée perspective, mostly focusing on “big polities” from a “high altitude.” Central Asia, or “Turkestan,” and its constitutive polities such as the khanates of Bukhara, Khiva, and Khoqand and the vast array of nomadic groups surrounding them are yet terra incognita in IR, specifically with respect to the pre-Tsarist period. By relying on both primary and secondary sources, this inductive research reveals how precolonial Central Asia was an interpolity order on its own, premised on heteronomy and based on the institutions of sovereignty between the khanates and suzerainty between khanates and nomads; territoriality; Sunni Islam; trade and slavery; diplomacy; and war and aq oyluk. This paper contributes to filling this gap, and to the broader literature on Eurasian historical orders, in three respects. First, it adds granularity, detail, and specificity to current IR knowledge on Eurasia by looking at smaller polities as opposed to empires, which as noted have been the main analytical focus so far. Second, the paper adopts an emic approach to uncover local practices, institutions, and norms of precolonial Central Asia, thus adding to the recent “Global IR” debate. Third, by focusing on a case where heteronomy was the rule, this paper adds a new case to the literature on the entrenchment and durability of heteronomy in historical IR and contributes to its theory-building.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

World society as a shared ethnos and the limits of world society in Central Asia

After the demise of the Soviet Union, the five Central Asian republics have struggled to maintain a degree of regional identity within the wider region of Eurasia by combining historical, religious and value-related discourses of commonality. In particular, ‘the Central Asian people’ has always been hailed as the ‘glue’ of this region, despite the fact that states in this area are following different political and economic orientations. Although ‘Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, Tajiks, Turkmens and Uzbeks have lived for centuries together as brothers’, as it is often heard in regional official statements, this ‘regional world society’ is being fractured by what I call the hyper-institutionalisation of pluralist institutions of international society. Using an English School approach, this paper explores the detachment of the Central Asian international society from the Central Asian world society, and investigates into the role played by the institutions of the former in weakening the substance of the latter.PostprintPeer reviewe

Turkestan and the rise of Eurasian empires: a study of politics and invented traditions. By Ali Anooshahr

PostprintNon peer reviewe

Central Asian regionalism or Central Asian order? Some reflections

This article reflects on how the concept of regionalism has been used to explain and interpret Central Asian politics since independence. It argues that regionalism, often a norm-laden analytical category based on Eurocentric assumptions, tends to paint the region as “failed” and regional states as incapable of institutionalizing multilateral relations. In its place, the article suggests the concept of order, which is more neutral and—through its focus on the operation of sovereignty, diplomacy, international law, authoritarianism, and great power management—is able to incorporate elements of both the conflict and cooperation that have marked the region’s politics since 1991.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

The institutionalisation of environmentalism in Central Asia

In 2021, in a largely ignored yet significant step towards regional coordination and convergence, the Central Asian republics took part in the 26th Conference of the Parties in Glasgow as a single entity, speaking with one voice and advocating a joint approach to climate change. Yet, to what extent is Central Asia complying with the norms and rules of environmental governance? Are environmental protection, climate-change mitigation and the push for an energy transition merely a set of shallow practices and rhetoric to signal performative compliance, or are they based on a logic of appropriateness and embedded in a normative understanding of green politics? Drawing on recent scholarship on international society and based on the assumption that environmentalism is now an established institution of the contemporary international order, this chapter considers whether, and in what way, Central Asia has embraced the institution of environmentalism, exploring discourses and practices at the global, regional and local levels. Far from being an exercise in pure theorisation, this can help shape policy engagement from and with the region, allowing us to assess the depth of commitment of these republics and societies in fighting climate change by distinguishing challenges deriving from structural, instrumental or ideological factors.Publisher PD

Beyond the pendulum : situating Adam Watson in International Relations and the English School

Among the founding figures of the English School of International Relations (ES) and the British Committee (BC), Adam Watson is perhaps the least studied and researched. How, for example, did his past as diplomat informed his Weltanschauung and his understanding of combining theory and practice? How did his academic relationship and friendship with other members of the BC and colleagues shaped his outlook on international politics? What was his political theory and philosophy? And what have his contributions been, not simply to the ES, but to IR writ large? This paper offers an intellectual portrait of Adam Watson and his persona, making use not only of his published written production, but also of so far unexplored archives and materials. Specifically, the paper situates Adam Watson within the ES and the broader IR panorama, taking into account the professional, academic, and human material that the extensive research for this paper has uncovered.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Is the English School still an underexploited resource? And whither the English School? An introduction

PostprintPeer reviewe

Regionalism

“Regionalism” is a polysemic term that represents both a subfield of international relations (IR) that studies regions of the world and a process of formation of regions themselves. Its meaning and content have evolved substantially from its inception in the 1940s to its most recent contributions in the early 21st century. More precisely, the field of regionalism was severely marked by neofunctionalism theory and an economic reading of international relations in the years of the Cold War and then embraced new contributions from post-positivist and critical theories and methodologies from the 1990s onward, which featured not only different manifestations and causes but also different normative meanings. Regionalism has progressively moved away from Europe over the years (both as a site of production of research and as an empirical case study) to explore non-European and, more widely, non-Western and postcolonial domains, challenging Eurocentric theoretical and epistemological assumptions in IR. In addition, the two subfields of comparative regionalism and interregionalism have become prominent. The field of regionalism is more dynamic than ever, developing, self-innovating, and becoming more conceptually aware, while at the same time being susceptible to weaknesses, blind spots, and potential for further improvement and deeper dialogue with IR theory.PostprintPeer reviewe

Accommodating revisionism through balancing regionalism : the case of Central Asia

The Central Asian states face the challenge of containing Russia’s revisionism in the post-Soviet space while maintaining cooperative relations with it and integrating diplomatically and economically into the international system. This essay argues that the Central Asian states are managing this revisionism through a strategy we refer to as ‘balancing regionalism’: cooperating among themselves and with multiple actors to insulate themselves from great power revisionist power politics and from the establishment of an exclusive sphere of influence in their region. This balancing regionalism operates through the following three mechanisms: bridging, dovetailing, and branding.PostprintPeer reviewe