Genesis and Discursive Assumptions of the Present IR Paradigm

By tracing the genealogy of IR studies to the early twentieth century, this chapter shows that the discursive formation of the field was made possible owing to a concern on the part of its theorists with questions of war and peace. Despite this dual dynamic, however, I show that it is the category of war that has been elevated to the status of the paradigm’s chief preoccupation. In order to illuminate the latter point, I bring to light the paradigmatic obsession within IR regarding conceptions of great power rivalries, power itself, the state, state survival, and national interest, categories that demarcate the boundaries of what can be thought of, imagined and explained in IR, all of which, as I show, exalt war to the detriment of a lasting, global peace. A history of the present of the status quo is provided by illuminating the paradigm’s state-centric orientation, tracing it to the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which signifies the birth of the modern state. The work of Thomas Hobbes is analyzed with a view to showing how his conception of the state of nature and sovereignty, once applied to the global sphere, gives rise to an international system that conceives international relations as a mere state of war.