【新刊速递】第30期 | International Relations, Vol.34 Issue 1, March 2020

【题目】International reconciliation on the Internet? Ontological security, attribution and the construction of war memory narratives in Wikipedia

【作者】Karl Gustafsson, 瑞典斯德哥尔摩大学国际事务研究所高级研究员。

【摘要】本文探讨了互联网经常标榜的促进和解上的潜力。本文将维基百科概念化为一个构建集体记忆的网站，并分析了维基百科中具有双边争议的关于中国抗日战争的中文及日文条目。本文从理论上探讨了如何理解这些网络上集体记忆叙事的构建问题。两种具有影响力的理解集体记忆与和解的理论方法：历史决定论和工具主义都难以完全解释这种情况。因此，本文认为本体性安全理论更适合于理解维基百科中的集体记忆的构建。本文还认为，即使维基百科存在更多促进中立叙述的规范，但对本体性安全的寻求仍会阻碍和解，支持内部群体而反对外部群体的这种隐性偏见发挥了保护积极自我认同的本体性安全管理机制的作用。

This article explores the Internet’s often touted potential for facilitating reconciliation. It conceptualises Wikipedia as a site for collective memory construction and analyses the Chinese- and Japanese-language entries on the bilaterally contentious Second Sino-Japanese War. It addresses the question of how to make sense of the construction of these online collective memory narratives theoretically. Both historical determinism and instrumentalism – two influential theoretical approaches to collective memory and reconciliation – have great difficulties in fully accounting for this case. Instead, it is argued that ontological security theory is better equipped for understanding collective memory construction in Wikipedia. It is suggested that ontological security seeking can impede efforts for reconciliation even when, as in Wikipedia, there exist norms seeking to promote more neutral narratives. It is argued that a subtle bias in favour of the in-group and against the out-group functions as a mechanism for ontological security management that protects a positive self-identity.

【编译】冯毓婧

【校对】王国欣

【题目】Emotions, international hierarchy, and the problem of solipsism in Sino-US South China Sea politics

【作者】Christian Wirth，格里菲斯大学德国全球与区域研究所(GIGA)。

【摘要】本文为中国在南海问题上自我挫败的行为提供了一种解释，这类行为使中国与其想要领导和加入的地区与国际社会渐行渐远，反而在该地区引入了本想保持距离的外国军事力量的存在。结合近期对情绪和等级制度在国际政治中作用的研究，本文显示了民族“屈辱”和“复兴”的强大叙事是如何影响中国海洋政治的。随着南海被纳入中国五千年文明史叙事的时间线内，美国及其盟友对中国领土主张的反对进一步加深了中国在观念上的“被孤立”。随之而来的唯我主义增加了暴力冲突的风险。

This study offers an explanation for Beijing’s seemingly self-defeating approach to the South China Sea that distances China ever more from the regional and international communities which it wants to lead and join while drawing in the foreign military presence that it seeks to keep at a distance. Combining recent research on the role of emotions and on hierarchy in international politics, this article shows how the powerful narrative of national ‘humiliation’ and ‘rejuvenation’ has informed Chinese maritime politics. As the South China Sea became incorporated in the linear timeline of China’s 5000 year civilizational history, the US’ and its allies’ push-back against Beijing’s territorial claims deepened China’s ideational isolation. The ensuing state of solipsism increases the risk of violent confrontations.

【编译】石雨宸

【校对】王国欣

【题目】When states and individuals meet: The UN Ombudsperson as a ‘contact point’ between international and world society

【作者】Francesco Giumelli是格罗宁根大学国际关系研究中心副教授，研究兴趣为国际制裁，欧盟对外政策，非法贸易等。

Filippo Costa Buranelli是圣安德鲁斯大学国际关系学院讲师，研究兴趣为国际关系理论，中亚地区主义，全球治理和国际安全等。

【摘要】国家与个人的互动往往被认为是国内政治所特有的现象，而国际政治则是“国家的领域”。然而，我们经常在各种场合看到国家和个人在国际层面的互动，譬如在为卢旺达、塞拉利昂、利比里亚以及前南斯拉夫问题所设的特别法庭（Special Tribunals）和在国际刑事法院（International Criminal Court）中。纵观国际关系理论，我们也许期待英国学派的国家关系理论会有相关的理论和分析工具以概念化国家与个人互动中的协同性。但这一点也并不明显。本文研究问题为在英国学派中国家和个人的互动是如何发生的？我们认为，这一互动通过“接触点（contact points）”发生。接触点是指那些将国家和非国家行为体(无论是个人还是团体)聚集在一起的国际机构，使他们在权责关系的平等基础上进行互动。“接触点”的概念会通过对联合国伊斯兰国（达伊沙）和基地组织制裁委员会办公室的分析来进行归纳总结。本研究具有理论意义。我们希望完善、深化并发展英国学派的理论与分析框架。我们希望我们的研究成果能够帮助英国学派学者概念化、分析那些使国家和个人平等地履行权责的次级机构（secondary institutions）。如此一来，我们将使得英国学派比其他国际关系理论更加精细地解释这些国家-个人协同。“接触点”的概念为英国学派提供了新的发展方向，因为国家与个人间的互动很可能会成为世界政治中的一个基本要素。

Interaction between individuals and states is considered a distinctive character of domestic politics, while international politics is the ‘realm of states’. However, it is becoming more common to encounter loci where both states and individuals interact at the international level, such as in the cases of the Special Tribunals for Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Liberia and the Former Yugoslavia as well as the International Criminal Court (ICC). Within the International Relations (IR) theory panorama, one would expect the English School of International Relations (ES) to have the theoretical and analytical tools to conceptualize synergies between states and individuals, but this is not evident. This article asks, how does the interaction between individuals and states take place in the ES? We argue that this interaction takes place via ‘contact points’, defined as those international bodies that bring together states and non-state actors, be they individuals or groups, interacting on equal grounds in terms of rights and responsibilities towards each other. The notion of ‘contact point’ is developed inductively by focusing on the Office of the Ombudsperson to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL; Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee. This research has theoretical implications. We aim to refine, sharpen and advance both the ES’s theoretical and analytical architecture. The contribution we seek to make is one that will better equip ES scholars to conceptualize and analyse those secondary institutions that allow states and individuals to enjoy rights and duties equally. By so doing, we will make possible for the ES to provide a more fine-grained account for these synergies than other IR theories. The notion of ‘contact point’ does set a new agenda for the ES, since interactions between individuals and states are likely to become a constitutive essence of world politics.

【编译】徐一凡

【校对】柯孜凝

【题目】The securitization audience in theologico-political perspective: Giorgio Agamben, doxological acclamations, and paraconsistent logic

【作者】Michael P. A. Murphy，渥太华大学博士生。

【摘要】在过去的二十年里，安全化理论已发展出了众多包含案例和批评的可靠文献。大多数的研究关注安全化的行为体及指涉对象，但忽视了该理论的受众——它们是通过接受或拒绝安全化行为体的请求，以决定安全化命运的主体。受众扮演的是有问题的矛盾体角色，因为这个安全化行为体所称的集体常常是被动的，因而经常被评论为是无关紧要的。另一方面，无论是哥本哈根学派对安全化理论的初始阐述，还是当下许多理论家的重申，都强调受众的主观能动性决定了安全化举措的成败。本文以政治神学为指导，通过教会的同源性和礼拜仪式的颂歌中的 “阿门”，来解释受众主动性与被动性的矛盾。教会会众是召唤被动接受者的事实，不否定它必须积极发挥必要和实质性的作用。这也正如对安全化受众主动性与被动性描述的矛盾并不是一个非逻辑的问题，而是一个弗协调的真理。

Over the past two decades, securitization theory has developed into a robust literature of cases and critiques. The vast majority of the attention paid to securitization has been to the securitizing actor and the referent object, leaving the audience – the body that determines the fate of a securitizing move by accepting or rejecting the securitizing actor’s request – undertheorized. The audience is presented as a problematic contradiction, because as a collectivity called by the securitizing actor it appears to be a passive body, critiqued thereby as potentially irrelevant. On the other hand, both the original Copenhagen school formulation of securitization theory and many of its current theorists reaffirm the agency of the audience to actively determine the success or failure of the securitizing move. This article turns to political theology for guidance, and explains the contradiction of the passive/active audience through homology to the ekklesia and the acclamation of ‘amen’ in liturgical doxology. The fact that the congregation is passive recipient of a call does not negate the essential and substantial role that it must actively play, just as the contradiction of the passive/active description of the securitization audience is not a problem of illogic, but a paraconsistent truth.

【编译】姚寰宇

【校对】李博轩

【题目】Neoliberal co-optation, power relations and informality in the Balkan International Relations profession

【作者】Nemanja Džuverović，贝尔格莱德大学副教授；Goran Tepšić，贝尔格莱德大学讲师。

【摘要】

The article attempts to assess the importance of informal networks in achieving internationally recognized academic standards set in four Balkan countries by the reform of higher education institutions and the International Relations (IR) profession in particular. Starting from the core-periphery division of the Global IR, the authors are examining the results of these reforms by focusing on the neo-liberalization of the university and the professional subordination of peripheral IR communities to the Western-dominated epistemic community (including ‘brain drain’ and recruitment of ‘organic’ intellectuals). Based on the interviews conducted with Balkan IR scholars, the authors conclude that informality is viewed as social capital, that is, a means of acquiring benefits by virtue of personal ties with the ‘gatekeepers’ of core IR. In that respect, interviewees suggest three possible solutions for overcoming the epistemic dependence of the Balkan IR community: development of local standards, stimulation of critical approach and better preparation for international standards, while the authors of the article also propose the fourth possibility: abandoning the core-periphery division, and thinking beyond geopolitical and geocultural divisions – the main idea behind the Global IR project.

【编译】姚寰宇

【校对】李博轩

【题目】Whose justice? The ICC ‘Africa problem’

【作者】Lucrecia García Iommi 美国费尔菲尔德大学政治学教授。

【摘要】这篇文章探讨了国际刑事法院中，关于“非洲问题”中未被研究的方面——处于不利位置的争议相关方。在一个长期存在文化差异的世界里，规范争论是不可避免的。然而，在一般情况下和制度规定允许的条件下，有关利益相关方提出有意义的争论，最终会使争论产生共识，而不是冲突。非洲作为利益相关方没有通过这些途径参与到《罗马规约》的谈判磋商、传播扩散和最重要的执行环节中。这一点有助于解释当前的规范危机，我们将其重构为一系列的争论行动。它还为解决危机指明了前进的道路。

This article explores an understudied dimension of the International Criminal Court ‘Africa Problem’ – low contestedness. In a world of enduring cultural differences, norm contestation is inevitable. Yet, regular and institutionalized access to meaningful contestation for stakeholders (contestedness) can turn contestation into consensus instead of conflict. African stakeholders did not enjoy such access in the negotiation, diffusion and, most importantly, in the implementation of the Rome Statute. This helps explain the current normative crisis, which we reconstruct as a series of contestation moves. It also informs the path forward to resolve the crisis.

【编译】戴赟

【校对】柯孜凝