Humanitarian responsibilities and interventionist claims in international society

This article calls for a widening of the debate about humanitarian intervention to incorporate insights from constructivism, 'Welsh School' Critical Security Studies, and critical approaches to Third World International Relations. After identifying a series of problems with the contemporary debate, which is dominated by the English School, it calls for a broadening of the concept of intervention and suggests a need to rethink the meaning of humanitarianism and terms such as the 'supreme humanitarian emergency'.

Globalisation, security and international order after 11 September

This article advances the discussion of the contentious question of links between global inequalities of power and violent responses, focussing on globalisation and non-inclusive forms of governance. Drawing on international political economy, the article criticises the nationstate-centrism in much political discourse, suggesting that both authority and security need to be reconsidered - to account for less plausible national borders and controls. It suggests that human security (including issues of development and equality) ought to replace national security as the primary focus of public policy. It draws attention to the intractability of difference, insisting that the terrorism of 2001 has complex transnational antecedents. Realist approaches to international order have become part of a problem to be overcome through further intellectual debate.

Reconciliation through communication in intercultural encounters: potential or peril?

As we reflect on the events of September 11th and their aftermath, there is strong motivation in many places to improve intercultural and international relations through communication. This laudable aim implicates the long history of research into intercultural encounters, which has always bad this goal. To achieve it, researchers and trainers must go beyond conceptualizing intercultural encounters as like interpersonal ones, except that participants have different and sometimes conflicting cultural rules and values. We must develop programs to train metaskills in analyzing miscommunication and its negative consequences. This requires the recognition that, in many interethnic and intercultural contexts, participants are not. motivated to communicate well. In such cases, the larger sociopolitical situation must be addressed, or skills training may even exacerbate the conflict. It is also crucial to understand intercultural communication as simultaneously intergroup and interpersonal, to incorporate both aspects into interventions, and to advocate for such training to improve intercultural relations.

Identity, difference, and the dilemmas of inter-Korean relations: Insights from northern defectors and the German precedent

Questions of identity have become increasingly central to the study of foreign policy and security, particularly in constructivist debates. But very few of the resulting insights have been applied to the Korean situation, where discussions about security and inter-Korean relations remain dominated by strategic and geopolitical issues. The main task of this article is to address this shortcoming by examining the experience of North Korean defectors in South Korea and the precedent of German unification. Both of these domains of inquiry reveal that identity differences between North and South persist far beyond the ideological and political structures that created them in the first place. Born out of death, fear, and longing for revenge, these identity patterns lie at the heart of Korea's security dilemmas. Unless taken seriously by scholars and decision makers, the respective tensions between identity and difference will continue to cause major political problems. (Key words: Inter-Korean relations, North Korean defectors, German unification)

Securing international society: Towards an English School discourse of security

English School approaches to international politics, which focus on the idea of an international society of states bound together by shared rules and norms, have not paid significant explicit attention to the study of security in international relations. This is curious given the centrality of security to the study of world politics and the recent resurgence of English School scholarship in general. This article attempts to redress this gap by locating and explicating an English School discourse of security. We argue here that there is indeed an English School discourse of security, although an important internal distinction exists here between pluralist and solidarist accounts, which focus on questions of order and justice in international society respectively. In making this argument, we also seek to explore the extent to which emerging solidarist accounts of security serve to redress the insecurity of security in international relations: the tendency of traditional security praxes to privilege the state in ways that renders individuals insecure.