- ホーム
- > 洋書
- > ドイツ書
- > Social Sciences, Jurisprudence & Economy
- > Politics, Society, Work
- > political science
Full Description
Power remains central to International Relations (IR) theory, yet scholars lack consensus on its definition. This book offers a comprehensive analysis of the concept of power in International Relations (IR), addressing one of the discipline's most fundamental yet contested ideas.
This book explores the historical and theoretical origins of major power conceptualizations—spanning realism, liberalism, constructivism, and post-structuralism—and applies them to a real-world crisis, the 1998 Turkish-Syrian October Crisis. The book poses three critical questions: What accounts for the multitude of power conceptualizations in International Relations? How has a particular conceptualization of power developed its specific meaning? What are the primary characteristics and focal points of the existing power conceptualizations in the discipline?
This book provides a vital resource for graduate students and researchers navigating the complexities of IR theory and offers valuable tools for applying theory to real-world phenomena.
Contents
1.1. The State of Power in the Discipline.- 1.2. Organization of the Study and Questions.- 1.3. Methods of Inquiry.- 2. Limitations Within Current State of the Literature.- 2.1. Power as an Ambiguous Concept.- 2.1.1. 'Power Over' or 'Power To'.- 2.1.2. 'Power' or 'Influence'.- 2.1.3. 'Zero-Sum' or 'Non-Zero Sum'.- 2.2. Traditions on Political Power.- 2.3. Power in International Relations Limited to Weberian Tradition .- 2.4. Power in International Relations Beyond Weberian Tradition.- 2.5. Remarks.- 3. Historicization of Power in the Discipline.- 3.1. Power in Positivist Approaches.- 3.1.1. Inauguration: The Possessional Power.- 3.1.2. The Rise of Relational Power on Criticisms to the Possessional Power.- 3.1.2.1. Methodological Criticism.- 3.1.2.2. Practical Limitations.- 3.1.2.3. The Relational Power as a Solution.- 3.1.2.4. International Political Economy Aspect of Relational Power: Asymmetric Interdependence.- 3.1.3. The Need for a New Face: The North-South Debate and the Institutional Power.- 3.1.4. Shared Characteristics of Positivist Power Conceptualizations.- 3.2. Power in Post-Positivist Approaches.- 3.2.1. International Relations Theory in the Post-Cold War Era.- 3.2.1.1. The End of Cold War.- 3.2.1.2. The Third Great Debate.- 3.2.2. Power in Positivism and Post-Positivism: Epistemological and Ontological Differences.- 3.2.3. Critical Utilization of Power: The Structural Power.- 3.2.4. Discursive Turn: The Poststructural Power.- 3.3. Traditions on Power and Concept(s) of Power in International Relations.- 3.4. Remarks.- 4. Comparison of Power Concepts on A Case: The 1998 October Crisis between Türkiye and Syria.- 4.1. The Case.- 4.2. Possessional Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.3. Relational Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.4. Institutional Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.5. Structural Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.6. Poststructural Power Analysis of the Case.- 4.7. Comparison: Strengths and Weaknesses of Power Concepts.- 5.Conclusion.
