The Review of International Affairs (RIA) Journal Archive
The Review of International Affairs (RIA) Vol. 73 No. 1185/2022
The Review of International Affairs (RIA), 2022 73(1185):5-25
There is an intense debate within the United States on whether it should continue with its current grand strategy of liberal hegemony or replace it with a more restrained foreign policy. Among the opponents of liberal hegemony, four prominent realist international scholars distinguished themselves: Christopher Layne, Barry Posen, Stephen Walt, and John Mearsheimer. However, their critique is flawed on two accounts: (1) they do not define liberal hegemony properly, and (2) liberal hegemony is actually a far more realist strategy than they argue. In this paper, the author criticises the realist critique in three steps. First, he points out that the critics do not answer the question of what hegemony as a state’s status in the international system is, and consequently, whether the U.S. is a hegemon or wants to become one. Second, he shows that the critics fail to deliver a convincing argument that the current U.S. grand strategy is liberal in its content as it is in its source. Third, he applies the critics’ own theories to the U.S. foreign policy case to show that liberal hegemony is in fact a realist grand strategy. The author’s ultimate goal is to make space for a better critique of liberal hegemony, which would still be realist but with the addition of some moderate liberal arguments.
The Review of International Affairs (RIA), 2022 73(1185):27-50
The paper illuminates several issues that arise from the lack of or extensive marginalisation of the female wartime experiences as a relevant debate topic in International Relations (IR) of the day. The analysis is positioned in feminist IR theories and gender studies of war and centres around the notion of continuum of violence as an optimal conceptual tool to embrace the complexities of interactions between women’s agency in war and their pervasive victimisation. By employing the concept of continuum of violence, two intertwined planes of female war experiences are examined: the experiences of knowing war and the experiences of doing war. The author concludes that, despite the representational power of the corporate and social media in conveying images of reality to an everwidening public, wartime experiences of women continue to be blurred and devalued in contrast to glorification of masculine ideal of male hero. Women’s experiences of war are officially acknowledged only if they fit the patriarchal order and dominant narratives on the state in international relations, not if they challenge gendered discursive practices. The gender stereotyping of women as “natural” non-combatants reproduces marginalisation of female experiences in doing war as female soldiers are either silenced after conflict or labelled as deviants.
The Review of International Affairs (RIA), 2022 73(1185):51-71
The paper emphasises the importance of information and communication technologies (ICT) in modern society. In the introductory part of the paper, the authors describe different terms, such as “information environment”, “information superiority”, “information warfare” (IW), and “information operations” (IO). The authors analyse the concepts of IW of the United States of America (US), China, and Russia. The mentioned research subject is directly related to the objective of the paper, aimed at emphasising and explaining strategic documents, manuals, handbooks, and other documents, given in the second part of the paper. The result of the research is the identification of similarities and differences in perceptions and views about information warfare. The authors conclude that at the present moment, all three countries are aware of the importance of information and ICT, especially in the case of armed conflict. The information space is increasingly an area of conflict between the mentioned countries, both in peace and in war. It is estimated that their importance will grow in the future. The advantage and dominance that the US used to have are decreasing in relation to the competitors.
The Review of International Affairs (RIA), 2022 73(1185):73-89
The subject of this research is the analysis of Argentina’s struggle to preserve its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the Malvinas, both diplomatically and militarily. The starting hypothesis of the research is that Argentina justifiably lays claim to the geographically closest Malvinas, which are one of the last objects of decolonisation, but that the United Kingdom wants to keep them under its control, considering them part of its territory. The author first explains the history of the Malvinas and when and in what way they were occupied and managed by European colonial powers. An explanation of the arguments based on which the official Buenos Aires and London claim the right to the Malvinas and of their current status will follow. The research results show that the formal-legal and historical arguments in the dispute over the Malvinas are on the side of Argentina, but that their population wants to remain under the rule of the British Crown, which greatly complicates the situation on the ground. We used the historical method, the case study method, and the comparative analysis in our research.
The Review of International Affairs (RIA), 2022 73(1185):91-112
The Southeast Asian countries use a hedging strategy to respond accordingly to the risk that the great power rivalry between the United States and China presents in the region. Hedging is focused on the creation of backup options to be used if the situation in the region escalates. These options are created through engagement with the potential threat and deterrence through a form of soft or indirect balancing. The article focuses on the behaviour of regional states, particularly Singapore, as an illustrative case study, to examine evolving hedging practices aimed at creating viable response options in the wake of the increased tensions in the region. The author argues that the second decade of the 21st century brought two developments that increased uncertainty in the region: growing tensions over the South China Sea and the American pivot to Asia initiated by the Obama administration. In response, the Southeast Asian countries were incited to hedge more directly by diversifying their economic partners and upgrading their defence capabilities. However, the US-China rivalry will continue to grow, and it will become more difficult to successfully use hedging strategy.
CONVERGENCE AND CONFRONTATION: THE BALKANS AND THE MIDDLE EAST IN THE 21ST CENTURY
The Review of International Affairs (RIA), 2022 73(1185):113-115