The International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners has been actively engaged in the development of a new, legally binding international framework for privacy and data protection. Given the existence of three international privacy and data protection regimes (i.e. the OECD Privacy Guidelines, the EU data protection framework and the APEC Privacy Framework) and the availability of other bilateral venues to resolve transnational data flows issues (e.g. the EU-US Safe Harbor agreement, the Umbrella Agreement and the latest, the Privacy Shield arrangement), the thesis asks whether the development of such a new regime is feasible. The main finding of the thesis is that in an era of a globalized society driven by the internet and information-communications technology, where all three of the leading international privacy and data protection regimes are consistently updating and modifying their respective frameworks, and where there is persistent divergence between the European Union and the United States approaches towards transborder data flow, the emergence of a new, legally binding international framework is unlikely, at least under the prevailing circumstances. Therefore, the thesis calls for a shift towards an institutionalized arrangement that is founded on existing international co-operation and convergence and that further expands ongoing inter-regime collaboration. The approach recommended in the thesis is an effective alternative to the development of a new, legally binding international framework, and even offers strong prospects for the evolution of a legalized arrangement for international privacy and personal data governance in due course.

This dissertation explores the ways in which media, visuality, and politics intersect through an analysis of contemporary war photography. In so doing, it seeks to uncover how war photography as a social practice works to produce, perform and construct the State. Furthermore, it argues that this productive and performative power works to constrain the conditions of possibility for geopolitics. The central argument of this project is that contemporary war photography reifies a view of the international in which the liberal, democratic West is pitted against the barbaric Islamic world in a ‘civilizational’ struggle. This project’s key contribution to knowledge rests in its unique and rigorous research methodology (Visual Discourse Analysis) – mixing as it does inspiration from both quantitative and qualitative approaches to scholarship. Empirically, the dissertation rests on the detailed analysis of over 1900 war images collected from 30 different media sources published between the years 2000-2013.

This thesis explores recent trends in Chinese international relations scholarship from the perspective of post-colonial and critical international relations theory. It begins by interrogating the now widespread view that ‘the discipline’ of international relations is profoundly Eurocentric. The claim to parochialism in international relations discourse is explained and substantiated through a critical re-reading of enduring myths in international relations discourse, which shape not only what we know to be international relations but how we mightknow it and who indeed the ‘we’ is that does the knowing. This research adopts a methodology of ghost hunting inspired by Avery Gordon’s work on ghosts and hauntings in the sociological imagination (Gordon 2008). It follows the meandering trail of a ghostly journey through international relations discourse, telling of multiple and conflicting encounters between Chinese international relations and the wider parochial/global discipline. In particular it examines recent debates surrounding the need for a distinctively Chinese approach to international relations research: a Chinese School of IR.Debates about the place of Chinese international relations research in the wider (parochial/global) discipline remain the focus of this research project. A close (re)reading of these debates reveals the many ways in which Chinese international relations discourse actively constructs ‘the discipline’ of international relations, singing it into life, whilst simultaneously unsettling the myths that make international relations possible. These trends are explored further through the use of two case studies of leading scholars – Yan Xuetong and Qin Yaqing – and the enduring debate between them (and between Chinese scholars in general) over whether or not China needs its own theory of international relations. The work of these two individuals has had a huge impact on wider trends within and about Chinese international relations. The thesis concludes with a return to the question of identity in international relations discourse and questions who is Chinese in the Chinese School and what are the implications of constructing ‘Chineseness’ through international relations discourse. I argue that the Chinese School project is perhaps best understood as an expression of contemporary Chinese nationalism.

While dominant International Relations (IR) theory has constructed the concept of security in such a way that excludes economic sanctions from considerations of violence, the track record of embargo tells a different story, one with a significantly higher death toll. This project challenges the borders of the hegemonic IR discourse to make room for a theoretical and political account of the deadly impacts of sanction regimes. Through a discourse analysis of IR theory, using Laclau and Mouffe’s holistic discourse theory, it looks to the spaces of meaning negotiation emerging from feminist IR theory. The renegotiated concepts of human security and structural violence make visible economic sanctions as acts of violence, and displace the binary oppositions of international/domestic, military/economic, public/private which shield embargo from the sight of its own violence. Having broken embargo out of its conceptually locked box, this project pushes further, and interrogates the connections of embargo and empire. Embargo functions to uphold imperial control and Western interests, while (re)producing racist colonial narratives. While deconstructing and reconstructing three competing understandings of embargo – embargo-as-nonviolent, embargo-as-violence, and embargo-as-imperial – I interrogate the political implications of hegemonic ways of knowing. I argue that, by challenging the hegemony of IR, we can unmask the practice of embargo, and locate its violent role in upholding imperial structures of power. / Graduate

The premiership of Shinzo Abe has had a significant impact on the debate surrounding Japanese foreign policy. In the autumn of 2020, Shinzo Abe resigned, ending what would become the country’s longest consecutive tenure in history, lasting from 2012 to 2020. Following the Second World War, Japan has per its 1947 constitution constrained its foreign policy unlike that of any other country of comparable size. During Shinzo Abe’s tenure, from 2012 to 2020, the academic debate surrounding the potential dismantling of said constraints has moved significantly towards finding a so-called remilitarization a likely outcome. International relations schools of realism and to some extent liberalism find that predictions of remilitarization might strike true while constructivist scholars find that this might be the case despite prior reservations. This is a significant shift in the debate consensus, especially on the part of constructivist analysis which often held that Japan’s unique character, be it norms or institutions, was inherently antimilitaristic. Through previous literature we learn that there was long a divide between authors arguing for a remilitarization being imminent while others take the opposite stance. A shift in Japanese foreign policy has a number of implications for international relations theory, previously a hallmark of constructivist argumentation surrounding identity and a thorn in the side of realist assumptions of power politics. A methodical approach of theory comparison sheds light on the empirical case of Japanese foreign policy by the means of assessing each relevant perspective’s arguments against each respective set of expectations in the event of a remilitarization. Through this study we find that contributions to the debate overwhelmingly argue for an increased possibility of a remilitarization taking place. Likewise, we find that this may come to play into the hands of both realism and liberalism as well as potentially doing so for constructivist analysis. Despite the case of an antimilitarist Japan being an example showcasing the strengths of constructivist analysis, it might instead provide an opportunity wherein it is able to showcase the flexibility and adaptability of constructivism as an analytical approach. The study also explores the possibility of whether there is room for employing a theoretically eclectic approach to the case at hand as a means to break the deadlock within the debate on the topic and offer analysis that escapes the pitfalls inherent in each theoretical perspective when employed on its own.

The past decades have seen a growing critique of international relations theory (IRT) as being Eurocentric, inspiring the development of alternative interpretations of international politics. One such development is the emergence of Buddhist IRT, which, with only a handful of texts written on the subject, is still very much in its cradle. This analysis attempts to systematically analyse this new contribution through the use of Lindberg’s VDP-triad of ideational analysis as well as thematic analysis. This is important given the power of ideas to shape people’s conceptions of the world and provide road maps for policy makers, as well as the role theory may have in the serving of certain interests. The analysis finds a theory rich in both value judgments, descriptions, and prescriptions, where the most important descriptions regard a unique ontology of radical interdependence, an ontology which deeply affects all other stand-points within the theory. Further, the analysis identifies several areas which need to be clarified and/or confronted in the future development of the theory, including a number of in-consistencies as well as a possible framework for the justification of violence and authoritarian policy.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The aim of this essay is to explain how IR theory relates to the European Union. Thisis motivated by the extensive use of empirical and descriptive studies on the EU. Togenerate knowledge on how theory relates to the EU, two seemingly differenttheories are compared. Neorealism and social constructivism are used to generatehypotheses, which are then tested on a quantitive study on the EU’s Common Foreignand Security Policy. The study covers the years of 2003-2005 and uses a statisticalmethod to present to empirical findings, which is supplemented by previous studieson EU’s foreign policy. The theoretical framework enables comparison of the twoemployed theories’ explanatory powers. The essay concludes that none of the theoriesprovides satisfactory explanations of in regard to EU’s global power and/or influence.Nevertheless, they are able to explain different aspects of the developments of EU’sforeign policy. Further theoretical studies should be undertaken in order to highlightthe issues of theory vis-à-vis the European Union.