Conference Program

The analysis of the construction of identity and domestic order in foreign policy discourse in the past three decades has enriched the debate on the foreign policies of major international and regional powers. The early accounts tended to conflate identity with subject positions within foreign policy discourses, overlooking the analysis of how identities appeal to the public and foster the production and reproduction of domestic order. Recent accounts analyse the affective dimension of discourses and the process of subjects’ identification with discursive orders and identities constructed within them to explain the reproduction of domestic order through foreign policy. However, the question of why the form of identity and social order constructed in foreign policy discourses take the form they do is not discussed in the existing literature. Engaging with this neglected issue, this article addresses the following important question: Why do political actors formulate specific constructions of identity and domestic order in foreign policy discourses? It argues that situating the contingent construction of foreign policy discourses within the struggles for hegemony over domestic politics and the construction of domestic order that competing political actors pursue is needed to understand the specific constructions of identity and domestic order and explain the domestic impacts of foreign policy more productively. While the article primarily makes a theoretical contribution, it uses the empirical case of Turkey's foreign policy practice since 2002 to illustrate the argument.

Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 are arguably the most important gas pipelines which has been constructed in the last twenty years from third countries into the European Union to satisfy its energy demands. These projects initiated by Germany and executed through consortiums of several Western European energy companies and Gazprom turned out to be a major stumbling block for the European solidarity and a common energy policy towards Russia. Notwithstanding harsh critism from Eastern European and Baltic States over the construction of these pipelines, German government fully supported the projects even when geopolitical crisis arose with the annexation of the Crimea. French government contrariwise supported the first Nord Stream pipeline and the early staged of the Nord Stream 2, however withdrew its backing when situation with Russia got tensed, although French energy champions were still involved in the project. Poland opposed both projects from its initiation until the end and led the coalition of likeminded EU countries. Which factors can explain the diverging policy preferences of individual EU member states? By applying the Societal Approach which is embedded within the domestic politics theories to governmental reference formation the paper analyses potential influences of electorate and of interest groups on governmental positions of Poland, Germany and France towards two pipelines. This paper provides a cross-country comparative assessment on the conditions of prevalence of two independent variables – material interests and value-based ideas – in shaping governmental position, and by doing so helps to understand continuity and change in governmental preferences.

This paper explores the historical trajectory and contemporary dynamics of Mexico's relations with the Asia-Pacific region. Delving into the backdrop of Mexico's historical ties with Asia and considering internal and global transformations, the study identifies the interests of Mexican political actors in the Asia-Pacific context. A comprehensive examination of the existing political and economic relations between Mexico and the Asia-Pacific region reveals a limited success in achieving diversification. The paper critically investigates the gap between strategic goals and actual relations, with a particular focus on the role of domestic politics in Mexico. It concludes that intra-elite conflicts have adversely impacted diversification attempts, preventing the establishment of the necessary institutional foundations for the successful implementation of Mexico's foreign policy objectives in the Asia-Pacific region.

Eric Ringmar stated that the social sciences were prejudiced against emotions. They were treated at least superficially, accepted as something that does not require defining. Additionally, emotions were understood as something that has a negative impact on policy-making and ephemeral and, therefore, difficult to study. In this vein, Rhonda S. Zaharny commented the impact of emotions on IR. While referring to Aristotle’s triad of logos, ethos and pathos, she noticed that logos once prevailed over pathos. This comment represents an approach that assumes that international relations in the past were not so influenced by emotions.

In recent years, however, IR scholars have made many studies on emotions in international relations. Though, generally interesting they do not lead to coherent conclusions, and meet methodological and theoretical obstacles. Most of them discuss the impact of emotions on decision-making. In my presentation I depart from such approach, because it focuses on a point observation, i.e. the impact of an emotion occurring on the situation when it appeared. It ignores the fact of the constant presence of emotions in interpersonal relations and the transition of one emotional state to another over the long term, as well as the influence of cultural factors on their experience, display and transformation, which can be observed over a longer period of time. I argue that that emotions are companions of any human activity, and their observation in longer perspective allows to understand better decision-making.