Shifting the paradigm

Abstract

A reiteration of the concluding section of ‘The paradigm that lost its way’ (International Affairs, October 2001) explains that the attitudes which shape Western behaviour and its approach to international relations are a product of the circumstances that prevailed from 1945 to 1953, which became entrenched by the Cold War. The article argues that this ‘adversarial national security paradigm’ is increasingly dysfunctional; it is ill‐suited to the global problems that lie ahead and the West should shift to a ‘cooperative global security paradigm’. The reflexive aspects of international relations are highlighted and the utility of attitudinal paradigms is discussed, before turning to consider how a paradigm shift might be engineered. Drawing on recent examples, the prerequisites are shown to be: an impulse for change (common fears, a shared vision); the removal of obstacles to change (usually the most difficult); an engine of change; and a precipitating event or agency. The rest of the article discusses how these prerequisites could be met and shows how Britain could act as precipitator. A postscript considers the relevance of 11 September 2001 to these ideas.

Children of the Troubles: The Impact of Political Violence in Northern Ireland

“…Ethno‐political conflict is now considered one of the most important threats to global security (Large, 1997; Mccgwire, 2002). Violent inter‐group conflict represents a difficult and intractable problem in many regions of the world.…”

Building Peace Through Knowledge

“…In Muldoon's view, ethno-political violence is understood to be one of the most salient threats to safety the world over (Mcguire 2002, cited in Muldoon 2004, and that violent intergroup, intrastate conflict has turned out to be a widespread legacy of the late twentieth century. In Muldoon's view, ethno-political violence is understood to be one of the most salient threats to safety the world over (Mcguire 2002, cited in Muldoon 2004, and that violent intergroup, intrastate conflict has turned out to be a widespread legacy of the late twentieth century.…”

Values in global health governance

“…The quest by wealthy countries for endless economic growth through facilitation of international capital mobility and foreign investment flows can constrain the ability of states to adopt (and pay for) alleviating measures, making the achievement of these rights all the more difficult (Benatar 1998, Falk 1999, Teeple 2000, MccGwire 2001a, 2001b, Pogge 2002, Labonte et al 2004, Labonte and Schreker 2007, World Watch 2 2008. As a result, public accountability through the democratic process may be at least partially undermined by the progressive accumulation of power by private corporations that have been freed from accountability by deregulation, and the privileging of their rights (over the rights of individuals) through international agreements, like the North American Free Trade Agreement, and through international organisations, like the World Trade Organisation and International Monetary Fund (Lee and Etheridge 1989, Bakker and Gill 2003, Koivusalo 2006, Fidler 2007.…”