VSE knjižnice (vzajemna bibliografsko-kataložna baza podatkov COBIB.SI)
  • Incomplete agreements and the limits of persuasion in itnernational politics
    Steffek, Jens
    Research on international political communication has been revived by constructivist International Relations scholars who have developed the conceptof 'arguing'. In this mode of communication, ... negotiators are brought torevise causal or normative beliefs that they previously held by means of persuasion. Thus arguing is conceptualized as a trigger of change in international politics. Yet, the underlying assumptions about the malleabilityof beliefs contrast with traditional approaches to international diplomacy. In the traditional view, diplomacy is a practice of containing rather than resolving fundamental disagreement. In this essay, I claim that whenever arguments are part of a process of legal reasoning, they can be politically effective without a demonstrable change in actors' beliefs. To account for such different effects of 'arguing', I introduce the distinction between complete and incomplete agreements from legal theory. Incomplete agreements occur when actors agree on a norm, a rule or a course of action, yet without agreeing on all principles, values or other reasons that stand behind it. The article illustrates the emergence of such an incomplete agreement with the negotiation history of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
    Vir: Journal of international relations and development. - ISSN 1408-6980 (Vol. 8, no. 3, Sept. 2005, str. 229-256)
    Vrsta gradiva - članek, sestavni del
    Leto - 2005
    Jezik - angleški
    COBISS.SI-ID - 24365405

    Povezava(-e):

    http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jird/journal/v8/n3/abs/1800056a.html

Vnos na polico