The problem of “harm” in the theory of international relations
https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2019-5-68-24-43
Abstract
The article provides an analytical review of the literature on the issue of harm in the theory of international relations, as a result of which this issue has been supplemented and expanded. The issue has initially been posed by Andrew Linklater as a question of physical harm to humans in the context of a state-centered international system. Audra Mitchell entered into a discussion with A. Linklater from the standpoint of post-humanism. From her point of view, harm should be evaluated not only and not so much from the human point of view, but from the perspective the whole world, the totality of animate and inanimate nature, including humanity. Alex Hoseason called into question the nature of causal relations in the theories of A. Linklater and A. Mitchell. From his point of view, in complex social systems, such as international system, non-linear causal relationships and multiple causality prevail. In addition, based on the philosophy of critical realism, Alex Hoseason suggested that not only actors in international relations, but also social structures can cause harm. This narrative is further developed by problematique of biopolitics. Political governance of biological aspects of the life of the population is directly related to the problem of physical harm in the sense that biopolitics, on the one hand, is aimed at maintaining the physical health of the population, on the other hand, politics is still at the core of biopolitics, so sometimes it can turn against all or part of its population as happened in Nazi Germany. Today, biopolitics at the global level is implemented in the UN development programs, in various international and transnational initiatives to promote international development, as well as in global health governance. Expanding the problematique of harm to biopolitics brings us back to the original anthropocentric model of harm proposed by A. Linklater, nevertheless, this step allows us to analyze not only the causes of harm, but also approaches to reducing it.
About the Author
M. A. GadzhievRussian Federation
Gadzhiev Musa Abdusamadovich – attaché of the embassy of the Russian Federation in the Republic of Cameroon.
Quartier Bastos, Boulevard de l'URSS, P.O. Box 488, Yaounde, Cameroun
References
1. Agamben G. 1998. Homo Sacer. Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998.
2. Agamben G. 2005. State of Exception. The University of Chicago Press.2005.
3. Dillon M., Lobo-Guerrero L. 2008. Biopolitics of security in the 21st century: an introduction. Review of International Studies. No. 34. P. 265-292.
4. Dodgson R., Lee K., Drager N. 2017. Global Health Governance, a conceptual review. Global Health. Routledge. P. С. 439-461.
5. Frenk J., Moon S. 2013. Governance Challenges in Global Health. The new England journal of medicine. No. 368. P. 936-42.
6. Hoseason A. 2018. Between philosophy and social science: Harm and its object in International Relations. Review of International Studies. 44.4. P. 717-737.
7. Linklater A. 2011. The problem of harm in world politics: Theoretical investigations. Cambridge University Press.
8. Mitchell Au. 2014. Only human? A worldly approach to security. Security Dialogue. Vol. 45, no.1. P. 5–21.
9. Deleuze J. 2000. Obshchestvo kontrolya [Control Society]. Elements. No. 9. URL: http://arcto.ru/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=547
10. Zizek S. 2002. Dobro pozhalovat' v Pustynyu Real'nogo [Welcome to the Desert of the Real]. Moscow: Pragmatics of Culture Foundation, 2002.
11. Lebedeva M.M. 2019. [Modern megatrends of world politics]. World economy and international relations. 63.9. P. 29-37.
12. Sokuler Z.A. 2001. Znaniye i vlast': nauka v obshchestve moderna [Knowledge and power: science in society is modern]. Saint-Petersburg: RKHGI. P.58-82.
13. Foucault M. 1996. Volya k istine: po tu storonu znaniya, vlasti i seksual'nosti [The Will to Truth: Beyond Knowledge, Power, and Sexuality]. Moscow: Castal.
14. Foucault M. 1999. Nadzirat' i nakazyvat': Rozhdeniye tyur'my [Oversee and Punish: The Birth of a Prison]. Moscow: Ad Marginem.
15. Foucault M. 2005. Intellektualy i vlast': Izbrannyye politicheskiye stat'i, vystupleniya i interv'yu [Intellectuals and Power: Selected Political Articles, Speeches, and Interviews]. Part 2. Moscow: Praxis.
16. Hardt M., Negri A. 2004. Imperiya [Empire]. Moscow: Praxis.
17. Hardt M., Negri A. 2006. Mnozhestvo: voyna i demokratiya v epokhu imperii [Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire]. Moscow: Cultural Revolution.
18. Zuckerman E. 2015. Novyye soyedineniya. Tsifrovyye kosmopolitiy v kommunikativnuyu epokhu [New compounds. Digital cosmopolitanism in the communicative era]. Moscow: Ad Marginem Press.
Review
For citations:
Gadzhiev M.A. The problem of “harm” in the theory of international relations. MGIMO Review of International Relations. 2019;12(5):24-43. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2019-5-68-24-43