Philip Cunliffe – författare

The liberal order is decaying. Will it survive, and if not, what will replace it? On the eightieth anniversary of the publication of E.H. Carr''s The Twenty Years'' Crisis, 1919-1939, Philip Cunliffe revisits this classic text, juxtaposing its claims with contemporary debates on the rise and fall of the liberal international order. The New Twenty Years'' Crisis reveals that the liberal international order experienced a twenty-year cycle of decline from 1999 to 2019. In contrast to claims that the order has been undermined by authoritarian challengers, Cunliffe argues that the primary drivers of the crisis are internal. He shows that the heavily ideological international relations theory that has developed since the end of the Cold War is clouded by utopianism, replacing analysis with aspiration and expressing the interests of power rather than explaining its functioning. As a result, a growing tendency to discount political alternatives has made us less able to adapt to political change. In search of a solution, this book argues that breaking through the current impasse will require not only dissolving the new forms of utopianism, but also pushing past the fear that the twenty-first century will repeat the mistakes of the twentieth. Only then can we finally escape the twenty years'' crisis. By reflecting on Carr''s foundational work, The New Twenty Years'' Crisis offers an opportunity to take stock of the current state of international order and international relations theory.

The liberal order is decaying. Will it survive, and if not, what will replace it? On the eightieth anniversary of the publication of E.H. Carr''s The Twenty Years'' Crisis, 1919-1939, Philip Cunliffe revisits this classic text, juxtaposing its claims with contemporary debates on the rise and fall of the liberal international order. The New Twenty Years'' Crisis reveals that the liberal international order experienced a twenty-year cycle of decline from 1999 to 2019. In contrast to claims that the order has been undermined by authoritarian challengers, Cunliffe argues that the primary drivers of the crisis are internal. He shows that the heavily ideological international relations theory that has developed since the end of the Cold War is clouded by utopianism, replacing analysis with aspiration and expressing the interests of power rather than explaining its functioning. As a result, a growing tendency to discount political alternatives has made us less able to adapt to political change. In search of a solution, this book argues that breaking through the current impasse will require not only dissolving the new forms of utopianism, but also pushing past the fear that the twenty-first century will repeat the mistakes of the twentieth. Only then can we finally escape the twenty years'' crisis. By reflecting on Carr''s foundational work, The New Twenty Years'' Crisis offers an opportunity to take stock of the current state of international order and international relations theory.

Written by leading scholars, this volume challenges the recent trend in international relations scholarship – the common antipathy to sovereignty.

The classical doctrine of sovereignty is widely seen as totalitarian, producing external aggression and internal repression. Political leaders and opinion-makers throughout the world claim that the sovereign state is a barrier to efficient global governance and the protection of human rights.

Two central claims are advanced in this book. First, that the sovereign state is being undermined not by the pressures of globalization but by a diminished sense of political possibility. Second, it demonstrates that those who deny the relevance of sovereignty have failed to offer superior alternatives to the sovereign state. Sovereignty remains the best institution to establish clear lines of political authority and accountability, preserving the idea that people shape collectively their own destiny. The authors claim that this positive idea of sovereignty as self-determination remains integral to politics both at the domestic and international levels.

Politics Without Sovereignty will be of great interest to students and scholars of political science, international relations, security studies, international law, development and European studies.

Written by leading scholars, this volume challenges the recent trend in international relations scholarship – the common antipathy to sovereignty.

The classical doctrine of sovereignty is widely seen as totalitarian, producing external aggression and internal repression. Political leaders and opinion-makers throughout the world claim that the sovereign state is a barrier to efficient global governance and the protection of human rights.

Two central claims are advanced in this book. First, that the sovereign state is being undermined not by the pressures of globalization but by a diminished sense of political possibility. Second, it demonstrates that those who deny the relevance of sovereignty have failed to offer superior alternatives to the sovereign state. Sovereignty remains the best institution to establish clear lines of political authority and accountability, preserving the idea that people shape collectively their own destiny. The authors claim that this positive idea of sovereignty as self-determination remains integral to politics both at the domestic and international levels.

Politics Without Sovereignty will be of great interest to students and scholars of political science, international relations, security studies, international law, development and European studies.

This book examines the normative tensions inherent in upward mobility within the international system, focusing particularly on the clash between sovereign self-interest and the putatively universal norms associated with international interventions. It provides extensive detail and deep analysis of Brazil’s nature as a rising power, and that nature’s implications for how the country crafts its international profile on issues such as intervention. In addition, the book proposes innovative ways of (re)organising thematic, conceptual and empirical research on the normative behaviour of emergent powers with regard to institutions of global governance and questions of intervention.

In analysing what distinguishes Brazil as a rising power, the contributors begin from the assumption that participation in intervention is an increasingly crucial element in demonstrating the capacity and responsibility for which demand accrues as a state seeks increased international profile. As such, the debates around intervention serve as an indicative locus for examining the clash of norms that accompanies emergence as a global player. The book’s approach is to organise the analysis around thematic rather than chronological or praxis-based lines, using the Brazilian case as an illustrative example capable of extrapolation to other emerging powers such as Turkey, India and others.

This work draws together rich empirical detail with sophisticated and varied conceptual analysis and will be of interest to scholars of international relations, Latin-American politics and global governance.

This book examines the normative tensions inherent in upward mobility within the international system, focusing particularly on the clash between sovereign self-interest and the putatively universal norms associated with international interventions. It provides extensive detail and deep analysis of Brazil’s nature as a rising power, and that nature’s implications for how the country crafts its international profile on issues such as intervention. In addition, the book proposes innovative ways of (re)organising thematic, conceptual and empirical research on the normative behaviour of emergent powers with regard to institutions of global governance and questions of intervention.

In analysing what distinguishes Brazil as a rising power, the contributors begin from the assumption that participation in intervention is an increasingly crucial element in demonstrating the capacity and responsibility for which demand accrues as a state seeks increased international profile. As such, the debates around intervention serve as an indicative locus for examining the clash of norms that accompanies emergence as a global player. The book’s approach is to organise the analysis around thematic rather than chronological or praxis-based lines, using the Brazilian case as an illustrative example capable of extrapolation to other emerging powers such as Turkey, India and others.

This work draws together rich empirical detail with sophisticated and varied conceptual analysis and will be of interest to scholars of international relations, Latin-American politics and global governance.

Taking Control argues that neither side in the Brexit debate really understood the European Union or what was involved in reclaiming Britain''s sovereignty. The EU is neither a supranational nanny state, nor an internationalist peace project. It is the means by which Europe’s elites transformed their own states in order to rule the void where representative politics used to be. Leaving the EU is a necessary but not sufficient step towards closing the chasm between rulers and ruled.

This book makes the democratic case for national sovereignty, arguing for a radical, forward-looking reconstitution of the British nation-state through strengthening representative democracy. It is essential for anyone who wonders why British politics is so dysfunctional and who wants to do better.