Abstract
In recent years, International Relations theorists have observed a resurgence in geopolitical rivalry, much of which is coalescing around cases of contested statehood. Yet, while there is a considerable volume of work on state recognition, the field would benefit from incorporating alternate approaches to geopolitics. A common approach entails treating geopolitical interests as independent variables for comparison against other factors. However, in prioritizing the comparison of variables, such work tells us less about how particular geopolitical interests arise in connection to cases of contested statehood. This paper therefore instead proposes a discursive approach to geopolitical interests. Following this approach, theorists will be able to treat grand strategies in a similar manner to the way the recognition scholarship already treats norms - as ideas that shape the dynamics of recognition but seldom point directly to specific recognition stances. By enabling theorists to account for the role of choice, contingency, and contestation in mediating grand strategies, this approach yields more comprehensive explanations of geopolitical interest and state recognition. In advancing its discursive approach to geopolitics and state recognition, this paper engages and extends recent constructivist work on grand strategy. The paper then illustrates the approach using the example of US policy toward the 1971 East Pakistan Crisis. © The Author(s) (2024).
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | ksae043 |
Pages (from-to) | 1-13 |
Number of pages | 13 |
Journal | Global Studies Quarterly |
Volume | 4 |
Issue number | 2 |
Early online date | Apr 2024 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Apr 2024 |
Externally published | Yes |