The vocabulary of international relations
Over at Duck of Minerva, Patrick Jackson asks a very good question: I am considering for my introductory World Politics class in the Fall. I call it “IR Vocabulary,” and the basic idea is to split students into pairs and have each pair go off and find consensus definitions of key IR terms, My intuition ...
Over at Duck of Minerva, Patrick Jackson asks a very good question: I am considering for my introductory World Politics class in the Fall. I call it "IR Vocabulary," and the basic idea is to split students into pairs and have each pair go off and find consensus definitions of key IR terms, My intuition here is that in order to have a good discussion about world politics, there are some basic terms that we need to know; some of these terms are more or less empirical and refer to objects in the world, while others are more or less conceptual and refer to ways of making sense of those objects. [Yes, yes, this is an unstable distinction; yes, empirical terms are conceptual and vice versa . . . but there is still a difference, if only a difference of degree, between a term like 'the balance of power' and a term like 'the Security Council.'] So here's my question for all of you: if you were going to draw up a list of twenty key terms that people ought to have working definitions of in order to sensibly and meaningfully talk about world politics, what would they be? What is the basic vocabulary that people have to know before they can start in with the arguing and the debating and the pondering? Click on over to give your answers. Of the top of my head, mine are below, split 50-50 between empirical and conceptual: EMPIRICAL Treaty Peace of Westphalia July 1914 Munich Bretton Woods Security Council Cold War NATO OPEC European Union globalization (admittedly, could go in either category) CONCEPTUAL power identity balance of power security dilemma prisoner's dilemma hegemony credible commitment reputation interdependence offense/defense balanceUPDATE: I've fixed the Westphalia term, because there actually is no Treaty of Westphalia. I knew this, but was sloppy about it in the post. Apologies.
Over at Duck of Minerva, Patrick Jackson asks a very good question:
I am considering for my introductory World Politics class in the Fall. I call it “IR Vocabulary,” and the basic idea is to split students into pairs and have each pair go off and find consensus definitions of key IR terms, My intuition here is that in order to have a good discussion about world politics, there are some basic terms that we need to know; some of these terms are more or less empirical and refer to objects in the world, while others are more or less conceptual and refer to ways of making sense of those objects. [Yes, yes, this is an unstable distinction; yes, empirical terms are conceptual and vice versa . . . but there is still a difference, if only a difference of degree, between a term like ‘the balance of power’ and a term like ‘the Security Council.’] So here’s my question for all of you: if you were going to draw up a list of twenty key terms that people ought to have working definitions of in order to sensibly and meaningfully talk about world politics, what would they be? What is the basic vocabulary that people have to know before they can start in with the arguing and the debating and the pondering?
Click on over to give your answers. Of the top of my head, mine are below, split 50-50 between empirical and conceptual:
EMPIRICAL
TreatyPeace of Westphalia July 1914 Munich Bretton Woods Security Council Cold War NATO OPEC European Union globalization (admittedly, could go in either category) CONCEPTUAL power identity balance of power security dilemma prisoner’s dilemma hegemony credible commitment reputation interdependence offense/defense balance
UPDATE: I’ve fixed the Westphalia term, because there actually is no Treaty of Westphalia. I knew this, but was sloppy about it in the post. Apologies.
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy
Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.
Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.
It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
