Conference Program

Practice theorizing has always been – as has standard theorizing of international relations practice(s) in IR and the social sciences anyhow – a very diverse field with implicit or explicit conceptual differences as to what “practice” is all about, what it would mean to “theorize” it and whether (and if so which) particular sets of “methods” would enable us to do it well. This paper aims at reconstructing a notion of practice (or “praxis”) and practices by highlighting a distinction between a representational and an anti-representational approach to the subject matter. Doing so is meant to (a) register (in an Wittgensteinian take at “meaning is use”) the very fact that there are different uses for different purposes, but also (b) to advertise a non-representational mode of theorizing. In arguing for a holistic conceptualization of practice and practices I am siding with Richard Rorty’s “anti-representationalist” view of thought and language. In this sense the following is meant to be less a form of critique that offers arguments against practice-theoretical understandings of practice and practices in “practice turn” scholarship as it is an exposition of alternative ways of looking at the subject matter that tries to render an anti-representationalist perspective look more attractive.

Romanticism offers a radical, alternative theoretical approach to understanding and engaging with the world. It challenges the conventional state/society binary, state-centrism, and power obsession entrenched in international relations (IR) theory. This article makes contributions to theorizing the change or continuity and contestation of world order by drawing on the German concept of Weltschmerz—a profound sense of melancholy and world-weariness born from a deep empathy for global suffering—and the Chinese philosophical vision of Tianxia, or all-under-heaven, which envisions a harmonious, inclusive global community. Though rooted in distinct cultures across different times, these concepts converge to articulate a romantic vision of the world that transcends cultural and national boundaries. The synthesis of Weltschmerz and Tianxia offers a new entry point for reimagining global relationships and world order, emphasizing the acute awareness of suffering in the world and the transformative potential to overcome it. In addition, travelling is an important method of cultivating this romantic sensitivity and sensibility to the world, which enables a deeper, more holistic understanding of world order. In sum, I argue that embracing romanticism to theorize IR and the world not only transcends the state/society binary but also the individual/collective binary. Moreover, it provides not only a more compassionate and sensitive outlook on the world but also potential for the transformation of world order.

The proponents of comparative regionalism agree that ‘region’ is a multi-valued concept (‘container-concept’) and its definition depends on the specific research problem (De Lombaerde, Söderbaum, Van Langenhove, Baert 2010). In modern studies, we are talking about the region’s entry into the macro-regional level. Moreover, representatives of neofunctionalism, institutionalism and especially transnationalism point out that regions are no longer exclusively state-centric, non-state actors and interest groups are now actively involved in regional cooperation (Acharya 2003; Söderbaum 2007).

Comparative regionalism is a kind of shorthand that includes different types and kinds of regional construction. Let us formulate some distinguishing features (markers) of comparative regionalism. A characteristic of comparative regionalism is that regional construction is a project or a politically motivated action. Second, in the theories of comparative regionalism, geographical and territorial factors continue to play an important role. Third, a distinctive feature of the regional approach is that researchers study already existing institutions and organizations or foresee the emergence of new institutions. Fourth, the process of building a region is almost always linked to the solution of practical problems. Fifth, regional approaches strongly focus on the normative and ideational foundations of regionalisation. Sixth, the relationship between region-building processes (regionalism) and region-forming processes (regionalisation) is important in theories of comparative regionalism. Seventh, regionalism can be open (soft) and closed (hard). Open regionalism enables project participants to be in other integration projects, without infringing on their rights. Closed regionalism implies participation only in a given regional project.

The paper addresses nuclear deterrence and the decision-making process as reflected in shifts in the contemporary international nuclear order. The article focuses on how the normative principles of nuclear deterrence are going through the process of contestation and how nuclear deterrence is being adjusted and transformed. It is assumed that the strategic decision-making process is based on a certain level of rationality, trust, and perception of the risks of miscalculation. The paper discusses conditions under which nuclear parity, first-strike stability, and crisis equilibrium can guarantee strategic stability and military balance and how relevant those strategic practices are. The paper argues that Norms contestation in the area of nuclear deterrence is the most common and usual practice, norms are contested all the time and international nuclear order as well as major principles of practice are being persistently reviewed and challenged. When it comes to nuclear deterrence, the nexus of national and systemic levels is of the essence, some norms along with the reputation of the state could be sacrificed for the national interests, if the national interests are prioritized.