This thesis brings the concept of humanitarianism sharply into focus within the discourse of international political theory. Existing literature examines humanitarianism obliquely, via debates on military humanitarian intervention or human rights, resulting in an impoverished account of a vital idea. Meanwhile, a vibrant discussion among professional humanitarians has recently questioned the nature of their endeavour, along lines that clearly fit the remit of international political theory. Bringing together these two discussions in the course of its critical analysis, the thesis argues that humanitarianism should be conceptualised as a political context in which we articulate, negotiate and defend our understandings of common humanity. Central to this politics are the ways in which we react to and conceptualise human suffering, through humanitarian crises that are often "crises of humanity". In sparking concern and mobilising responses to suffering, the affective underpinnings of the humanitarian impulse create a complex and shifting backdrop to extensions of solidarity and humanitarian action. At the heart of this action is the idea of rescue, a crucial "presumptive occasion" of our moral life. But an important part of humanitarian action consists in the efforts to institutionalise the humanitarian impulse. In this sense human rights and projects of global justice represent important crystallisations of humanitarian concern, yet neither can fully capture the more contingent workings of the humanitarian impulse. What emerges is an understanding of humanitarianism as a broad discussion, central to the identity of contemporary liberal international political theory, but with a scope best gleaned not from cosmopolitan accounts, but from a more fluid internationalist tradition of thought. The thesis concludes that the importance of this theoretical approach will be borne out by the complex and far-reaching practical challenges that humanitarianism is set to confront over coming decades, not least the "crisis of humanity" threatened by climate change.

The United States, a great power, and Syria, a small state, have both been at the heart of the politics of the Middle East since the end of World War II. The systemic conditions of the international system and the shifting politics of the region brought these states into contact and, at times, confrontation, but these interactions never produced a sustained period of security cooperation. By the beginning of the 1970s, both states had begun to reconsider and reshape their positions in the region. The period from 1973 to 1977 produced a rare period of cooperation between these two states in the case of two regional conflicts: the Arab–Israeli conflict and the Lebanese Civil War. To understand that shift in relations, this thesis explores the question: What accounts for the security cooperation between Syria and the US during this period? This thesis makes four observations: first, as results of changes in both states’ leaderships, realpolitik, alongside ideational considerations, became more pronounced in both states’ conceptions of their security environment in the Middle East and their relations with one another. Second, while the Cold War was the predominant context for the US’s interactions with Syria at the start of the 1970s, interactions between the US and Syria were also shaped by local conditions that emerged after the October War. Third, both states, distrustful of the other’s intentions, formed temporary alliances based on short-term common interests. Finally, the regional conflicts themselves introduced circumstances that both strengthened and weakened their security cooperation. While their security cooperation achieved limited results, their relations established a framework for these two states’ subsequent relations. The unresolved issues that emerged from this period of their relations served as the main context for their cooperation and conflict in the following decades, even after the death of Hafiz al-Asad in 2000.

A small body of mostly anecdotal evidence suggests that governments have undertaken legal, policy, institutional, and regulatory reforms to enhance their chances of becoming eligible for assistance from the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC). But we know little about the strength and scope of the so-called "MCC Effect”—in particular, why it seems to exert varying levels of influence across time, space, and policy domains. I collect two novel sources of data on the MCC Effect in order to explain the conditions under which the MCC eligibility standards have influenced the reform efforts of developing country governments. Through formal coding of archival data, I construct a database of more than 14,000 country policy-domain-year observations that measures whether and how governments change their policy behavior in order to achieve or maintain MCC eligibility. I then employ logit, rare event logit, and three-level random intercept modeling techniques as well as propensity score matching methods to explain the policy responses and non-responses of governments to the MCC eligibility criteria. I also draw on data from a first-of-its-kind survey of 640 development policymakers and practitioners in 100 low income and lower-middle income countries to "ground truth" inferences drawn from analysis of the archival data. My findings suggest that a range of factors influence the probability that a government will pursue reform ctivities in response to the MCC eligibility criteria. However, the central contribution of this thesis is the theoretical and empirical argument that the network positions of change management teams shape whether, when, and how externally inspired reforms get adopted and implemented. In this regard, I call attention an underappreciated factor that shapes the adoption and implementation of externally-influenced reforms: the presence of a policymaking team that has sufficient autonomy to introduce disruptive changes to the status quo, but also sufficient embeddednesss to overcome domestic political opposition.

This thesis examines how the concept of 'self-determination' has featured in high-level international discourse at key moments in the 20th and 21st centuries. The exact language of 'self-determination' was internationalised in 1918 by Woodrow Wilson in the political context of the First World War, and in reaction to Lenin’s earlier references to the concept, which he had developed between 1903 and 1917. Subsequently, 'self-determination' has been cited in important international legal settings, as in the League of Nations’ Aaland Islands case (1920–1921), in the UN Charter (1945), during the UN discussions on General Assembly Resolution 1514 (1960) and the International Covenants on Human Rights (1966), and at the International Court of Justice proceedings on Kosovo (2008–2010). Together, these uses of 'self-determination' constitute the 'self-determination moments' of my thesis. Taking a hitherto unexplored approach to 'self-determination', this thesis builds on previous scholarship on the concept – produced primarily within the fields of international law and international relations – and examines it from the perspective of intellectual and international history. Applying the methodology of Quentin Skinner, the thesis shows that the significant international mentions of 'self-determination' have sought legitimation. Specifically, the thesis argues that the central international references to 'self-determination' over the past hundred years have sought legitimation by invoking two different ideas of freedom: a 'radical' idea of freedom, and a 'liberal conservative' one. Based on a wide-ranging analysis of archival materials, published primary sources, original interviews, and relevant secondary works, the thesis finds that the liberal-conservative idea of freedom has dominated the international appearances of 'self-determination' at the selected 'self-determination moments'. However, it is the radical idea of freedom that has repeatedly triggered the re-emergence of ‘self- determination’ as a meaningful concept in international discourse, and kept its potency alive.

After three decades of seemingly insurmountable suspicion and bilateral crises, the post-Cold War period has witnessed a remarkable renewal and strengthening of Sino-Russian relations. Many of the underlying factors and circumstances contributing to the bilateral rapprochement of the past two decades remain yet to be analysed. This thesis illuminates the role of one of the factors involved in this process: the development of institutional links between the two states. Bilateral institutions, which were almost entirely absent until the mid-1990s, have now rapidly proliferated into a dense network of commissions and sub-commissions, working groups, and institutionalised exchanges, encompassing virtually all sectors of interaction between China and Russia. In addition, both countries are increasingly interacting in the framework of multilateral institutions and international organisations. This thesis examines what role the institutionalisation of Sino-Russian relations has played in enabling both states to forge a closer working relationship with each other. It begins by providing a brief comparative overview of the most common accounts of the factors that led to increasing Sino-Russian rapprochement in recent decades, assessing these factors through the lenses of relevant approaches in International Relations theory. It points out deficits in these common accounts, concluding that bilateral cooperation remained fraught with substantial problems and obstacles in all of these dimensions. Hence, these factors alone did not provide a policymaking context in which a persistent mutual rapprochement was particularly likely, let alone predetermined. The thesis then examines to what extent the process of institution-building has contributed to fostering and perpetuating bilateral rapprochement. It employs analytical concepts borrowed from Neoliberal Institutionalist theory and applies them in the context of several case studies of institution-building between China and Russia. It explores the extent to which the newly-created bilateral institutional channels have facilitated the implementation of cooperative policies between both countries by bringing together relevant stakeholders and rendering each country’s policy towards the other more stable, more predictable, and more well-informed.

The practices of NGOs and development agencies located in the global North have been criticised for displaying (post-)colonial continuities. Concurrently, western feminism has been critiqued for assuming universality in the experiences of white western women. Hence there is a need for reflection on operating within and resisting of these power structures. Using interview data, this thesis investigates the reflections of women NGO workers located in the global North working on gendered issues to support women in and from the global South. The thesis situates the women’s reflections in the context of the critiques arising from feminist theory, postcolonial theory, global civil society and critical development literature. In this theoretically informed empirical study it is analysed how the women NGO workers understand their own work practices and how they negotiate their relations with the women they seek to support. This work can be placed within a relatively new genre within critical development literature, which focuses on the subjectivities, experiences, and identity construction of NGO and development workers. The aim of the thesis is first to contribute to our understanding of the complexities and contradictions in the positioning of women who engage in justice seeking practices related to gendered issues in a global context. Second, the intention of this work is to enhance the reflexive and analytic practices of NGOs/IGOs and their employees. The thesis sketches a multi-faceted picture of the women NGO workers that transcends the good versus bad binary; it argues that while the narratives of the women NGO workers underline their complicity in hegemonic discourses, the narratives also show their awareness of the contentiousness of their position and point to possible ruptures of and resistances to the dominant power structures.

This thesis assesses the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) as it has played out in Nigeria. The APRM is an initiative by the African Union (AU) and the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) to promote good governance through self-assessment and monitoring by African states. The APRM is particularly interesting as a continental (rather than single country) programme which puts the good governance agenda in the hands of African states themselves (rather than international financial institutions, for example). Focusing on the National Programme of Action (NPoA) of 2009 - 2012, the research finds that the APRM has had little or no impact on governance in Nigeria. Notwithstanding the NPoA's limited contributions to national development, the entire process has failed to recognise, engage and tackle the underlying socio-political dynamics of politics in the country, which have the most impact on governance structures and processes. The thesis accounts for this outcome by examining structure (through the role of actors) and underlying socio-political dynamics, both nationally and internationally. In terms of actors the research explores the role of individual leaders, NEPAD and APRM secretariats (national and continental), federal state representatives, regional and sub-regional organisations, international donors, and civil society in the APRM process. In terms of underlying factors, Richard Joseph's theory of prebendalism gives analytical power to understanding the APRM within Nigeria's political culture, while the neo-Gramscian perspective of cultural hegemony enables an analysis of the APRM within the broader international context. Both contribute to a holistic assessment of the APRM in Nigeria. Neither one of these two theoretical contributions is able to offer a comprehensive assessment if used unmodified or on their own. The APRM has the potential to open new political spaces for collaborative engagement between government and civil society in Nigeria, with the possibility of beneficial effects for governance and accountability. So far, however, this potential has not been realised. This must be judged as a significant shortcoming to date.

No description available.

It is a rare multinational corporation which neglects to express interest in Corporate Social Responsibility. Across countries, across industries and across organisations, ideas about ‘giving back’, ‘working with communities’, and ‘being responsible’ are discussed as commonly as profit margins and shareholder return. Despite, or perhaps because of, this plenitude, there remains confusion in understandings of what this phenomenon actually is and how it works. Of particular relevance for scholars of International Relations are lacunae in understanding how such an idea, value-based and emphasising organisational consistency, can be meaningful for actors operating simultaneously in many diverse locations, and under the freedom of international anarchy. Further, questions arise about what this phenomenon, reliant on ideas of good and bad, may illuminate about the movement of norms through the international system. These are the two interrelated problems that the dissertation seeks to address. Following a constructivist approach, the dissertation uses a qualitative case study method, focusing on one main corporate case (Rio Tinto Group). Insights derived from the main case study are then compared with two secondary corporate cases, to strengthen their validity and reliability. Key findings about the operational question, of how corporate social responsibility operates in multinational firms, point to the importance of broad, non-prescriptive and value-based policies at the global corporate level, with plenty of space for flexibility and variation in local implementation. In this way, corporations are able both to claim global consistency and local appropriateness. Insights about the movement of norms through the international system then follow, taking their cue from the well-known work of Finnemore and Sikkink (1998). The study finds that, while the essence of their ‘downwards’ model remains valid, applying it to the workings of international CSR points up limitations. Specifically, it appears that norms can move in various directions, not only ‘downwards’, but also ‘upwards’, as well as in cycles. Further, it appears that the direction of movement is influenced by local circumstances, and in particular the stability of the local political and economic environment.

No description available.