The, And, By Stephen Krasner And John Ruggie 's Conceptions Of International Relations

1303 Words Nov 18th, 2014 6 Pages
Many of the authors of the readings for this week seem to be writing past each other. While all of these readings come from a 10-year time span and discuss multilateralism and/or sovereignty, there are stark distinctions in who or what is being discussed as the referent object of international relations or world order. This begs the question, can we read, for instance, Stephen Krasner and Robert Cox in dialogue with each other or are they writing on the same general topic, but from such distinct frameworks that the discussion ultimately collapses? Even if the discussion does collapse, is there something worthwhile in attempting to engage these authors? This paper attempts to place the authors from this weeks readings in conversation. In doing so, it becomes clear that Krasner and John Ruggie’s conceptions of international relations are shortsighted and problematic. However, Craig Murphy, Sol Picciotto, Cox, and Claire Cutler all have beneficial insights into global governance. In particular, Cox’s contention that multilateralism has been effective in institutionalizing a liberal economic order that should not be understood as synonymous with international cooperation aids us in our consideration of world order. Krasner defines the “sovereign state model” as “a system of political authority based on territory, mutual recognition, autonomy, and control (2001, 18).” Krasner uses this definition, not to promote the sovereign state model as the global modus operandi (or so…
Open Document