Books by Rodger A. Payne
Historically, international institutions have been secretive and not particularly democratic. The... more Historically, international institutions have been secretive and not particularly democratic. They have typically excluded almost all interested parties except the representatives of the most powerful nations. Because of this "deficit of democracy" international organizations and regimes have found themselves the target of protest movements and lobbying campaigns. Democratizing Global Politics finds that, in response to this mounting legitimacy crisis, international organizations and regimes are beginning to embrace new norms of participation and transparency, opening the decision-making process to additional political and social actors and creating opportunities for meaningful external scrutiny. Two case studies examine the construction of such "discourse norms" in the Global Environmental Facility and the World Trade Organization. The authors conclude that these normative changes not only legitimize international institutions—they also promote the development of political community on a global scale.
Somewhere in the course of his life, Louisville industrialist and philanthropist H. Charles Grawe... more Somewhere in the course of his life, Louisville industrialist and philanthropist H. Charles Grawemeyer developed the idea of a series of awards that would pay homage to creativity and genius in areas of human endeavor too much ignored by other awards. At the same time he wanted to bring recognition to two institutions he considered pivotal in his life—the University of Louisville, where he received an excellent education through the Speed Scientific School during the Great Depression, and the Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, on whose board he served for many years. The results are the Grawemeyer Awards in Music, Political Science, Education, Religion, and Psychology—a set of distinctions meant to, in Grawemeyer's words, "help make the world a better place."
The Power of Ideas, Volume II continues where the first volume left off. While Volume I chronicled the first fifteen years of the award ending with the 1997 awards, this volume continues forward with an additional ten years of awards, ending with the year 2007.
Papers by Rodger A. Payne
International Negotiation and Political Narratives A Comparative Study, 2022
Constructivist theorists view norms as shared understandings that reflect `legitimate social purp... more Constructivist theorists view norms as shared understandings that reflect `legitimate social purpose'. Because the focus is on the ideational building blocks that undergird a community's shared understandings, rather than material forces, persuasive communication is considered fundamentally important to norm-building. In practice, this means that frames are crafted by norm entrepreneurs so as to resonate with audiences. However, the constructivist empirical literature illustrates the central importance of material levers in achieving normative change. Those who promote specific norms also manipulate frames strategically to achieve their ends and do not necessarily convince others to alter their preferences. The global debate over `core labor standards' is highlighted to illustrate the various means by which frames can be distorted by communicators acting strategically, perhaps even to secure their own instrumental interests or to maintain their powerful status. Norms that do not reflect a genuinely voluntary consensus can be seen as illegitimate.
Perspectives on Politics, Sep 2007
The international relations field has recently taken a communicative turn. Social constructivists... more The international relations field has recently taken a communicative turn. Social constructivists, for instance, regularly examine frames, persuasion, and other discursive mechanisms by which actors reach intersubjective agreement. Critical theorists add an overtly normative dimension by embracing the transformative potential of public deliberation. In contrast, realists and neorealists claim that outcomes are determined by the distribution of material power—political communication and discursive ideals are virtually meaningless elements in international politics. Put simply, talk is cheap. Given this view, it is puzzling that many prominent realists participate actively in national foreign policy debates and in that context both implicitly and explicitly embrace views about political discourse that are remarkably consistent with those held by constructivists and critical theorists. In the recent Iraq debate, the realists reveal lies, political spin, and other distortions of the debate promulgated by government elites and their allies. They challenge the legitimacy of established policies and critique excessive secrecy. Most importantly, these neorealists seek to transform public and elite consciousness so as to produce social pressures for alternative outcomes. Realists have apparently rejected their own theoretical presuppositions about the meaning and role of political communication, which has important implications for both policy debate and IR theorizing.
Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Jun 2012
Major powers are frequently urged to embrace grand strategies tied to particular International Re... more Major powers are frequently urged to embrace grand strategies tied to particular International Relations theories. In the case of United States foreign policy, scholars generally analyse a well-known set of strategic choices – primacy, selective engagement, offshore balancing, collective security and cooperative security – favoured by relatively mainstream realist and liberal thinkers in International Relations. This article explores the evolution of cooperative security as an idea from its clear ties to liberal and neoliberal international relations theory to its current understanding in world politics, which is surprisingly consistent with many emancipatory ideals of critical International Relations theory. Cooperative security no longer merely implies multilateralism, negotiation and arms control. Rather, security is now more frequently described as indivisible, and genuine cooperation is said to require shared decision-making and consensual practices. Non-governmental organisations are more and more granted a voice in security discussions, as are international institutions. While weapons and warfare remain important security concerns, the cooperative security agenda today includes ideas associated with human security, including environmental calamity, global inequality and hunger.
Making Sense of International Relations Theory (2nd edition), 2013
International Studies Review, 2019
Dr. Strangelove continues to be viewed as one of the most acclaimed films of all-time. Likewise, ... more Dr. Strangelove continues to be viewed as one of the most acclaimed films of all-time. Likewise, international relations (IR) experts commonly list the film among the most essential IR-themed movies. The IR scholars who discuss Dr. Strangelove as a text or recommend it for courses generally claim that it can be used to explain nuclear deterrence, the security dilemma, mutually assured destruction, Cold War competition, and various other traditional serious concerns of the field. They also recognize that the satirical film is critical of nuclear strategy. This article considers Dr. Strangelove’s sexual subtext, involving important metaphors and symbols that IR scholars characteristically ignore. Yet, for decades, film critics and scholars from other disciplines have identified and emphasized the importance of the film's comedic “sexual framework” and concluding “wargasm.” Director Stanley Kubrick even acknowledged these key elements in private correspondence. The film suggests that the national security establishment's masculine view of the utility of nuclear weapons and deterrence are comparable to absurd male sexual fantasies. Feminist IR scholars frequently note that mainstream scholars largely ignore their critique of masculine views of the discipline and nuclear strategy. The article concludes that scholars in the field should both prioritize Dr. Strangelove’s sexual subtext and rely upon feminist contributions to help understand those elements.
In recent years, many international relations scholars have been discussing
films, books, and tel... more In recent years, many international relations scholars have been discussing
films, books, and television programs featuring zombies, largely because
such narratives are thought to provide a compelling metaphor for thinking
about a diverse array of contemporary threats. These range from relatively
traditional threats posed by violent terrorists to nontraditional threats from
epidemics or mass migration. However, because zombie narratives are generally
apocalyptic, employing them can provide a misleading and dangerous
understanding of international security. By contrast, satirical and comedic
zombie stories provide interesting alternative narratives that coincide with
the emancipatory objectives of critical security studies. Satirical narratives focusing
on elites characteristically critique these powerful figures, often revealing
them to be self-centered buffoons. Indeed, satire and black comedy
can be quite subversive, reflecting critical and potentially transformative
notions—about threats and other dimensions of security politics. Comedies
typically center upon ordinary people, emphasize their regular lives, and
end happily—aligning with the aspirations of the human security agenda.
Non-Nuclear Peace; Beyond the Nuclear Ban Treaty, 2020
No nuclear-armed states or their closest allies have signed the Nuclear Ban Treaty. These states ... more No nuclear-armed states or their closest allies have signed the Nuclear Ban Treaty. These states emphasize that nuclear weapons remain necessary for deterrence purposes, even as many of them also claim to support disarmament in the long run. This inconsistent approach creates an opportunity to stigmatize nuclear deterrence strategy via the use of public ridicule. The chapter examines numerous instances when academics and former policymakers, diplomats, and military leaders have ridiculed nuclear deterrence strategy and/or weapons deployments, often by identifying logical inconsistencies and paradoxes associated with various policies. The conclusion explains that U.S. President Donald Trump’s bellicose nuclear threats create ongoing opportunities for ridicule.
Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 2020
Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda seemingly departs drastically from United States foreign po... more Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda seemingly departs drastically from United States foreign policy as practiced for many decades. This paper assesses the implications of the new U.S. approach for its relationship with Canada and for world order more broadly. America First overtly threatens the status of a wide array of bilateral and multilateral agreements as the U.S. seeks new one-sided deals with friends and foes alike. The President’s bombastic populist rhetoric and the labeling of aluminum and steel imports from Canada and other states as national security threats to the U.S. also weaken social cohesion in the western security community. The paper discusses whether U.S. behavior aligns with expectations of international relations theories and explores how Canada and other middle powers are responding to the changes wrought by America First.
Canada–US Relations; Sovereignty or Shared Institutions?, 2019
A foreign policy of “America First” seems to pose a significant challenge to the liberal internat... more A foreign policy of “America First” seems to pose a significant challenge to the liberal international order and perhaps to U.S.–Canadian cooperation. This paper investigates the bilateral relationship in light of developing disagreements about the status of longstanding international agreements. Will Washington’s new emphasis on placing America First threaten major institutions and the future of cooperation? Can multilateralism and the liberal international order endure without American leadership or, at minimum, a firm commitment to various institutions? Research will explore Canada’s responses to ongoing U.S. attempts to alter or eliminate NATO, free trade agreements (NAFTA and the WTO), and the Paris Climate Accord.
Journal of Human Rights, 2020
Donald Trump’s populist, nationalist “America First” agenda advocates a transactional, zero-sum, ... more Donald Trump’s populist, nationalist “America First” agenda advocates a transactional, zero-sum, hypercompetitive, and sovereigntist view of US foreign policy, which many scholars and policymakers conclude poses a considerable challenge to multilateralism. We explore the threat America First presents to the international human rights regime as reflected in important institutions and norms. We survey America First policies regarding immigration and refugee norms as well as norms prohibiting torture and war crimes. We examine its position on the UN Human Rights Commission and the International Criminal Court, consider Trump’s sympathies for autocratic governments, and explore the development of the Commission on Unalienable Rights. Finally, we explain why the America First norm transgressions pose a novel threat to the human rights regime, potentially more worrisome than prior US norm violations. America First’s performative element risks reconstituting US identity as an outsider state, if not an outlaw, vis-à-vis the international community.
In an important monograph published in 191, Thomas Schelling and Morton Halperin argued that arms... more In an important monograph published in 191, Thomas Schelling and Morton Halperin argued that arms control and military policy should be committed to the same fundamental security purposes-preventing war, minimizing the costs and risks of arms competition, and curtailing the scope and violence of war in the event it should occur. 1 The strate gists, writing primarily about the budding nuclear age and the missiles then being deployed, additionally emphasized that arms controllers and military planners alike should be committed to developing secure arsenals that do not invite war. In particular, especially vulnerable and danger ously provocative weapons systems should be limited because they might tempt or encourage preemptive or even preventive war. In the preface to the 1985 reprint edition, Schelling and Halperin note that this strategic understanding of arms control "is now widely accepted." 2 Indeed, their strategic logic continues to have significant influence. 3 Despite the continued utility of the "strategy of arms control," we argue in this article that the international community is constructing an ill-considered and potentially dangerous biological weapons taboo that rebukes its funda mental logic. For decades, states attempted to develop an arms control regime that limited both the acquisition and use of biological weapons. However, ef forts to limit biological weapons capabilities have now stalled, even as prohibi tions on biological weapons use have been maintained and even strengthened. The resulting regime effectively allows states to retain suspicious capabilities
Strategic Studies Quarterly, 2010
States have constructed an ill-considered and potentially dangerous biological weapons (BW) taboo... more States have constructed an ill-considered and potentially dangerous biological weapons (BW) taboo that rebukes the fundamental logic of arms control. Historically, to prevent war, minimize the costs and risks of arms competition, and curtail the scope and violence of war, states embraced an arms control regime that limited both the acquisition and use of BW. However, efforts to limit BW capabilities have stalled even as prohibitions on their use have been maintained and strengthened. The new regime effectively allows states to retain suspicious capabilities that will be viewed as very threatening by their peers. This approach is particularly troublesome as many states now embrace counterproliferation strategy and the prospect of preventive war. The Obama administration seems to have preserved perilous elements of the so-called “Bush Doctrine.” The international community should redouble efforts to build a more effective and verifiable biological weapons nonproliferation regime to augment the existing taboo against use.
Arms Control (now Contemporary Security Policy), 1988
The International Studies Encyclopedia (online edition), 2012
Power plays an important role in the formation of international organizations (IOs), including th... more Power plays an important role in the formation of international organizations (IOs), including the formal institutions established by nation-states to promote collective action at the intergovernmental level. Power is commonly defined as the ability or authority to act, to accomplish a task or to create something new. Those who wield power are typically seen as having the ability to influence or even control the behavior of others. The willingness of states to employ material (or “hard”) power to accomplish their goals—whether those goals primarily reflect the interests of the strongest states or the shared preferences of many states—has long been the subject of scrutiny by international relations (IR) scholars. More recent scholarship approaches the topic from different perspectives, with particular attention to both the power generated by collective action and the collective identity created during the recognition and pursuit of common purposes. According to Michael Barnett and Raymond Duvall, there are four types of power: compulsory, institutional, structural, and productive. This typology can be linked to the way four major schools of IR theory view IOs: realism, neoliberalism, constructivism, and critical theory. Realist and neoliberal institutionalist schools use compulsory or institutional views of power to explain the development of regimes and their effects, while social constructivists and critical theorists rely on productive or structural power to tackle the meaning and importance of regimes. Scholars argue that regimes serve a cooperative function very similar to more formal IOs and provide a rationalist account of regime formation and behavior.
This article offers a conceptualisation of international regimes as a legitimate global political... more This article offers a conceptualisation of international regimes as a legitimate global political community. A legitimate political community features consensual norms and principles that have been openly debated by interested members of global society. Relying on a critical theoretical method, we argue that by conceptualising certain regimes as public spheres it is possible to apply and interpret practices of Habermasian discourse ethics to this institutional form.
The Indian Ocean and US Grand Strategy, 2014
Uploads
Books by Rodger A. Payne
The Power of Ideas, Volume II continues where the first volume left off. While Volume I chronicled the first fifteen years of the award ending with the 1997 awards, this volume continues forward with an additional ten years of awards, ending with the year 2007.
Papers by Rodger A. Payne
films, books, and television programs featuring zombies, largely because
such narratives are thought to provide a compelling metaphor for thinking
about a diverse array of contemporary threats. These range from relatively
traditional threats posed by violent terrorists to nontraditional threats from
epidemics or mass migration. However, because zombie narratives are generally
apocalyptic, employing them can provide a misleading and dangerous
understanding of international security. By contrast, satirical and comedic
zombie stories provide interesting alternative narratives that coincide with
the emancipatory objectives of critical security studies. Satirical narratives focusing
on elites characteristically critique these powerful figures, often revealing
them to be self-centered buffoons. Indeed, satire and black comedy
can be quite subversive, reflecting critical and potentially transformative
notions—about threats and other dimensions of security politics. Comedies
typically center upon ordinary people, emphasize their regular lives, and
end happily—aligning with the aspirations of the human security agenda.
The Power of Ideas, Volume II continues where the first volume left off. While Volume I chronicled the first fifteen years of the award ending with the 1997 awards, this volume continues forward with an additional ten years of awards, ending with the year 2007.
films, books, and television programs featuring zombies, largely because
such narratives are thought to provide a compelling metaphor for thinking
about a diverse array of contemporary threats. These range from relatively
traditional threats posed by violent terrorists to nontraditional threats from
epidemics or mass migration. However, because zombie narratives are generally
apocalyptic, employing them can provide a misleading and dangerous
understanding of international security. By contrast, satirical and comedic
zombie stories provide interesting alternative narratives that coincide with
the emancipatory objectives of critical security studies. Satirical narratives focusing
on elites characteristically critique these powerful figures, often revealing
them to be self-centered buffoons. Indeed, satire and black comedy
can be quite subversive, reflecting critical and potentially transformative
notions—about threats and other dimensions of security politics. Comedies
typically center upon ordinary people, emphasize their regular lives, and
end happily—aligning with the aspirations of the human security agenda.
As urged by those using quantitative data, this article examines a case using declassified archival information in order to examine responsiveness in a situation ripe for manipulation. Specifically, U.S. reactions to Soviet Sputnik launches are scrutinized. President Eisenhower was much less concerned about Soviet actions than was the general public but nonetheless substantially altered many defense programs in order to meet perceived public demands. The President acknowledged privately that at least two-thirds of a spending supplement was used to meet public fears, not real security needs. This finding is inconsistent with prevailing realist theories and standard historical interpretations.
This paper will explain the buildup to the Iraq war in terms of farce – focusing on the period between August 2002 and March 2003. As is now well-known, the war was premised on evidence and rationales that have been largely undermined by subsequent revelations and events. In retrospect, the claims were improbable and perhaps even ludicrous. Can international relations scholars recognize a farce while they are observing it?
promote inclusive and open discussion about important issues like torture. Alternatively, do these films and programs help create particular and powerful narratives that minimize debate? This paper briefly identifies depictions of torture in a few popular cultural products and then investigates both the elite reaction to them and the broader cultural meaning.