Right to Universal Mobility: A Consequentialist Cosmopolitan Reading

this straight-to-the-point essay offers a consequentialist cosmopolitan reading of the right to universal mobility that intends to avoid the risk of arbitrary or asymmetric positions. It argues that migrants\u2019 rights to freedom of movement have to be considered as a prima facie cosmopolitan right, a right that ought to be politically recognised and that contributes to individual Well-being and subsequently to world welfare. However, the paper also maintains that such right has to be balanced against a prima facie equally valid right of original residents to preserve their societal political project, for this contributes to individual well-being and subsequently to world social welfare, too. Deploying similar reasons, both migrants\u2019 and residents\u2019 claims then ultimately derive their legitimacy from a single principle of global justice, that of maximising social welfare by guaranteeing freedom of choice on different political levels. Hence, a fair political system ought to symmetrically balance these two contrasting claims by appealing to their common principle of justice

Il cleavage destra-sinistra alla sfida della globalizzazione

L\u2019ipotesi che sostengo \ue8 proprio che un quadro concettuale con migliori chance di interpretare correttamente la costellazione politica attuale sia quello centrato sul fenomeno della globalizzazione. \uc8 con riferimento al posizionamento politico rispetto a questioni di policy centrali per la globalizzazione come l\u2019integrazione dei mercati, la delega di sovranit\ue0, la partecipazione alle organizzazioni regionali, ma anche l\u2019accettazione delle politiche sovranazionali ortodosse e l\u2019adozione di standard \u201cuniversali\u201d, che noi possiamo meglio capire le divisioni politiche di oggi, il campo sul quale si gioca la partita politica di quest\u2019epoca

Mapping Alternative Models of Global Politics

This paper investigates the principal competing visions of global politics that are currently advanced in the public discourse about globalization in opposition to the traditional state-centered perspective. The first part of the paper develops an analysis of ideal models as cultural resources that grounds the different reading of human bonds. The second part applies the notion of ideal models to the new scenario of globalization, and identifies four alternative interpretations of the notion of global politics: namely Neo-liberalism, Cosmopolitanism, Alter-globalism, and Dialogue among Civilizations. The principal characteristics of these four notions are presented in order to map the current debate on the future of global politics.This paper investigates the principal competing visions of global politics that are currently advanced in the public discourse about globalization in opposition to the traditional state-centered perspective. The first part of the paper develops an analysis of ideal models as cultural resources that grounds the different reading of human bonds. The second part applies the notion of ideal models to the new scenario of globalization, and identifies four alternative interpretations of the notion of global politics: namely Neo-liberalism, Cosmopolitanism, Alter-globalism, and Dialogue among Civilizations. The principal characteristics of these four notions are presented in order to map the current debate on the future of global politics.Articles published in or submitted to a Journal without IF refereed / of international relevanc

World Order Scenarios Post Russia-Ukraine War

The war in Ukraine is further advancing a polarizing trend that has been emerging in international affairs for at least the past 15 years. Horrible as any war is, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is not going to change structurally the world in which we have been living the past few decades; the change is quantitative, not qualitative. In fact, the Russian actions, rather than revising, are indeed accelerating a pattern of polarization and compartmentalization that has been growing in the political, economic, military, and cultural realms of global affairs

Towards a "Global" Political Risk Analysis

The purpose of this paper is to test the relevance of the globalization variable for Political Risk Analysis (PRA). The concept of political risk and the analysis methodology adopted and used in PRA are extremely heterogeneous, varying profoundly case by case. However a common pattern can be identified. In almost every definition or operational concept of political risk, the focus relies almost entirely on the internal dimension. The models developed by both public and private agencies and institutions tend in fact to base their models on variables and indicators internal to the country object of the analysis. In those few cases in which the external variables are taken into consideration, they refer to classical events such as wars. In our opinion this approach is limited because it does not capture the structural processes generated by the global transformations of the last decades. In today\u2019s globalized and ever changing world, we think that in any political risk analysis model it is fundamental to include a transnational perspective. A transnational variable should accordingly be crafted in order to complement the national variable by weighting the effects of the international and global dimension on local and national socio-political events. By testing out hypotheses with reference to two indexes related respectively to stability and governance, we find evidence of a positive relationship between the level of global integration of a country and its degree of stability and even more its level of governance. While these results (to be further tested with more sophisticated statistical tools in the follow up of the research) remain preliminary, they are sufficient to delineate a new understanding of political risk analysis that \u2013 by taking into consideration current concepts of political risk and modern theories of globalization \u2013 integrates in a comprehensive framework the more traditional variables of political risk with a new transnational variable

Conflict society: understanding the role of civil society in conflict

This article analyses the relationship between civil society and conflict. It aims to provide an analytical framework to unpack this complex relationship and assess the impacts which civil society may have on conflict. In a first section, it analyses the implications of context on civil society, namely the implications that statehood, democracy, nationalism, development and international presence have on the nature of civil society. In the second section it examines more specifically the role of civil society in ethno-political conflicts, or as we rename it ‘conflict society’. The final section turns to the identification of different factors determining the impact of civil society on conflicts, including political identities, frameworks of action and political opportunity structures in which civil society actors operate. Accordingly, the different combinations of these determinants lead to the formation of civil society actors and ensuing actions that can either fuel conflict, sustain the status quo, or build peace.This article analyses the relationship between civil society and conflict. It aims to provide an analytical framework to unpack this complex relationship and assess the impacts which civil society may have on conflict. In a first section, it analyses the implications of context on civil society, namely the implications that statehood, democracy, nationalism, development and international presence have on the nature of civil society. In the second section it examines more specifically the role of civil society in ethno-political conflicts, or as we rename it ‘conflict society’. The final section turns to the identification of different factors determining the impact of civil society on conflicts, including political identities, frameworks of action and political opportunity structures in which civil society actors operate. Accordingly, the different combinations of these determinants lead to the formation of civil society actors and ensuing actions that can either fuel conflict, sustain the status quo, or build peace.Articles published in or submitted to a Journal without IF refereed / of international relevanc

Post-Western World Orders and East Asian Future

The paper investigates the main macro-political trends at the international level. After reviewing the conceptual maps of international politics and the various future scenarios for globalisation, the paper examines the three main world order arrangements that could emerge in the coming decades. These are derived from the current distribution of power at the international level and from current trends, and are extrapolated as possible future developments. These eventualities involve the four major powers in the world to come: China, the European Union, Russia, and the US. The international system will most likely pivot on the interaction between the declining hegemon, the US, and the emerging power, China. It is with reference to such interaction that we need to envisage possible future world orders. It is clear that the other remaining powers, not to mention other countries, will have to strategically adapt to the behaviour of these two superpowers. Many see the relative decline of the US and the growth of China as setting the two on a collision course. It is difficult to predict whether a real armed conflict will occur between the two superpowers. There are significant 188 balancing dynamics between the two countries; first and foremost is their economic interdependence. What can be affirmed more easily is that there will be a continuous, if not growing, tension between the two. As outcomes of this tension, three main scenarios of world order can be drawn. World Order One: The West vs. the Rest. In this scenario, tension remains a central feature, which polarises the world in a new bipolar system. The EU is pulled towards, and even more greatly integrated within, the transatlantic community, while Russia follows a similar trajectory within a Sino-centric Asian community. World Order Two: Eurasian Integration and US Solitude. In this scenario, a process of inter-regional integration is promoted by China and accepted by both Russia and the EU. The Eurasian mass is progressively integrated within the largest economic area in the world. All other regional aggregations suffer a strong pull effect. The US and the American continent at large goes adrift in geopolitical solitude, generating inward-looking isolationist stances. World Order Three: Enlarged West vs. China. In this scenario, the West remains predominant, China is more and more isolated, and Russia is pulled back towards Europe and the larger transatlantic community. In the last part of the paper, the implications of the three scenarios drawn concern for East Asia

Classical International Utilitarianism

Although the classical utilitarians\u2019 outlook was universalistic and all-inclusive in principle, international relations were nonetheless not high on their agenda: their central concerns were private morality and public domestic ethics. From Bentham to Sidgwick, the major political interest was on the domestic organisation of society, which included both rules of personal conduct and a collective legal framework. Underlying this narrow focus was the utilitarians\u2019 belief in the ideal of the division of political work. Within this division, depending on the sociopolitical circumstances, an indirect concentration on the local could result in the maximisation of the overall world outcome. Accordingly, the utilitarians elaborated a sophisticated theory on the contingent relation between the scope of the utility principle and that of the institutions within which it was applied. Thus, while fostering a universalist interpretation of the principle of utility (even to the extent of including non-human species), Bentham was nonetheless firm, for instance, in maintaining that the social fact of the habit of obedience, upon which the application of the utility principle depended, was still very much anchored to the domestic dimension, and thus the correlate institutional framework of state sovereignty. Thus, an underpinning assumption of the utilitarians\u2019 rationale held that within the international political constellation of their time, Philosophical Enquiries : revue des philosophie anglophones \u2013 d\ue9cembre 2017, n\ub0 9 \u2013 \uab Cosmopolitisme et utilitarisme classique \ubb 10 the best way to maximise universal utility was to concentrate primarily on domestic governmental policies. In practice, their prescriptions supported an international system based on fairly independent sovereign states, which in being reciprocally exclusive generated an environment of outranking. Classical utilitarians did undoubtedly propose a number of political reforms, such as the codification of international law, the establishment of an international court, publicising foreign negotiations, and new machinery for international treaties, which were certainly in the right direction for the democratisation of international relations. And even more importantly, they elaborated a method for applying consequentialist ethics to international relations based on the balancing of universal principles and social theory which is still viable. However, their works cannot be considered fully satisfactory, for the overall outcome of the international system they envisaged would arguably be sub-optimal by their own measure. The lack of multilevel political participation leading to would-be international political institutions denied the possibility for each individual to pursue fully his or her own well-being and consequently denied the promotion of the general well-being. While the intensity of international interaction during the 19th century was definitely not equal to that of the current level, and therefore the share of individual wellbeing dependent on international or global phenomena was undoubtedly less significant than today, the situation was nevertheless not one of fully self-contained communities. A truly consistent consequentialist prescription would have indicated an enlargement of the degree of political participation to the international domain. And yet, that Sidgwick\u2019s writings do propose a few steps in this direction is an indication of the stark divergence from the Hobbesian state tradition that classical utilitarian thought represents. It is for this reason that an understanding of such a thought is still crucial to any understanding of consequentialist international ethics today

Erratum Partnerships in International Policy-Making

n/

Cosmopolitanism restated. A choice-based consequentialist perspective on global democratic inclusion: The cases of migration and world federalism.

Seeking to tackle the widely acknowledged democratic deficit of current international affairs, the argument presented here for consequentialist cosmopolitanism sets itself apart from other international political theories, in that it provides a normative framework for an all-inclusive global politics. Such a framework offers a critical alternative to the phenomenon of international political exclusion as legitimised by a number of influential theories of justice, including realism, nationalism, contractarianism, harm theory and the cosmopolitan project. Deriving from an examination of international consequentialist thought over the last two hundred years, the model developed here combines a new ethical interpretation of consequentialist principles with a new political interpretation of cosmopolitan principles. From this combination, a theory of consequentialist cosmopolitanism is drawn which utilises a single principle of justice on different levels of political action. That principle is the maximisation of the world welfare condition. Within this setting, the promotion of global welfare is pursued through the deployment of procedural instruments in terms of rights. In particular, the right to freedom of choice and the right to political participation form the core of the normative project. The institutional recognition of these rights as universal entitlements, in fact, is crucial in order to delineate an enfranchising conception of political agency in each level of political action, including the global. Evidence in favour of the proposed version of non-exclusionary cosmopolitanism is provided in examples of two case studies of such enlarged citizenship: a horizontal case concerned with migration, and a vertical case regarding supranational institutions as embedded in a system of cosmo-federal democracy