Honor in International Relations

Tsygankov, Andreï P.

doi:10.1017/cbo9781139179072.004

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…111.See Tsygankov 2012; Zarakol 2011. The legacy also facilitates intervention in other countries’ political affairs; see Way and Casey 2018.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Struggles for Recognition: The Liberal International Order and the Merger of Its Discontents

Adler‐Nissen¹,

Zarakol²

2020

Int Org

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Liberal International Order (LIO) is currently being undermined not only by states such as Russia but also by voters in the West. We argue that both veins of discontent are driven by resentment toward the LIO's status hierarchy, rather than simply by economic grievances. Approaching discontent historically and sociologically, we show that there are two strains of recognition struggles against the LIO: one in the core of the West, driven by populist politicians and their voters, and one on the semiperiphery, fueled by competitively authoritarian governments and their supporters. At this particular moment in history, these struggles are digitally, ideologically, and organizationally interconnected in their criticism of LIO institutions, amplifying each other. The LIO is thus being hollowed out from within at a time when it is also facing some of its greatest external challenges.

show abstract

“…111.See Tsygankov 2012; Zarakol 2011. The legacy also facilitates intervention in other countries’ political affairs; see Way and Casey 2018.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Struggles for Recognition: The Liberal International Order and the Merger of Its Discontents

Adler‐Nissen¹,

Zarakol²

2020

Int Org

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This article does not aim to explain the complex foreign policies of Russia or its allies. Scholars have provided a wealth of insights into domestic decision-making processes, leadership, and status concerns in Russian foreign policy (Babayan, 2015; Bakalova, 2016; Clunan, 2009, 2014; Forsberg et al, 2014; Larson and Shevchenko, 2010, 2014; Neumann, 2008; Pouliot, 2010; Tsygankov, 2012; Williams, 2007). Understanding dynamics of status-related contestation in IOs also benefits from analysis at levels beyond domestic politics, 5 including trends in institutionalization and salient status dimensions.…”

Section: Content Of Status-related Contestation: How Is It Constructed?mentioning

confidence: 99%

When democratic governance unites and divides: Social status and contestation in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

Hecht¹

2020

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars and practitioners are increasingly attentive to contestation against symbols and institutions underpinning international order(s). Yet International Relations scholarship can benefit from greater understanding of ways in which contestation interacts with salient dimensions of social status in specific international organizations (IOs). Drawing on evidence from the history of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), with a focus on democratic governance and human rights, this article analyzes status-related contestation as a significant, yet under-examined type of contestation in multilateral diplomacy. Status-related contestation conveys dissatisfaction about symbols, institutions, and actors which reinforce socially significant divisions that place a state (or group of states) at a social disadvantage in a particular multilateral venue. International organizations provide unique social contexts which affect the content of contestation. Building on scholarship in social psychology, constructivism, and status hierarchies in world politics, the article analyzes the evolution of a dimension (or basis) of social status in the OSCE and illustrates that, beyond domestic and material interests, state representatives communicate social identity-related concerns through language, for example, that expresses discontent with dividing lines, unfairness, or (dis)respect, in attempting to minimize negative social identities in multilateral organizations.

show abstract

“…Glory and honor, unlike trait-status, are based on esteemed behavior , rather than on attributes such as wealth, coercive capability, intelligence, or gender (Tsygankov, 2012: ch. 2).…”

Section: Sub-components Of Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking interaction seriously: Asymmetrical roles and the behavioral foundations of status

Wolf

2019

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Status has once again become a prominent topic in international relations. However, vague, incomplete, and incompatible definitions continue to stifle the development of a cohesive research program. Even the most sophisticated conceptualizations proposed fail to comprehend the full range of status conflicts and ambitions. Current research centers on collective beliefs about the traits that are valued in individual actors, so it especially fails to properly account for status differentiations that emerge through bilateral interactions and for defiant acts that upend local status hierarchies. It also neglects the most intense status infringements: acts and relationships that are humiliating. To remedy this conceptual weakness, this article will first review conceptual work in International Relations and beyond. It will then present an integrated model of two distinct status hierarchies — prestige and role status — and their causal linkages. In so doing, the article will attempt to clarify how “status” relates to similar concepts, such as “authority,” “prestige,” “honor,” and “glory.” The explanatory value of this consolidated status framework will be demonstrated through a more nuanced and consistent discussion of Russia’s seemingly erratic status disputes with “the West.”

show abstract

Honor in International Relations

Cited by 4 publications

References 36 publications

Struggles for Recognition: The Liberal International Order and the Merger of Its Discontents

Struggles for Recognition: The Liberal International Order and the Merger of Its Discontents

When democratic governance unites and divides: Social status and contestation in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

Taking interaction seriously: Asymmetrical roles and the behavioral foundations of status

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About