US foreign policy and the pragmatic use of international institutions

The use of international institutions by the United States is characterised by pragmatism. US officials approach institutions as instruments of convenience across time, across regions, and across economic and security issues. US political rhetoric since the end of World War II has emphasised the importance of multilateralism. But in practice, the US approach reflects a process of trial and error and a tendency to focus on what works in terms of US domestic and foreign policy interests. Successive US administrations have proved flexible in modifying, expanding, neglecting and even discarding those institutions whose initial instrumental purpose is no longer essential. These twists and turns have proved frustrating to America's economic and security allies who have been forced to bear the brunt of adjusting to the changing institutional preferences of their more powerful partner.     

Bridging the information gap: A survey of politics and international relations PhD students in Australia

This article analyses the results of the first exclusive survey of politics and international relations PhD students in Australia. The survey was completed by 186 students from 22 universities. Students were asked 54 questions covering five areas: candidate choices, degree structure, research interests, workload pressures and the role of the Australian Political Studies Association (APSA). Our findings indicate that students base their choice of institution on pre-existing personal relationships rather than university reputation or research expertise; want more coursework and methodological training; believe scholarship-application outcomes are not based on merit; feel they cannot meet the field's workload expectations; and are unaware of APSA. This article raises important questions about the opportunities and support that individual academics, departments and university administrations provide to potential and existing students.

本文分析了澳大利亚首次政治学与国际关系学博士生专门调查的结果。调查涉及22所大学的186位学生。这些学生回答了涵盖五个领域的54个问题,包括博士候选人选择、学位结构、研究兴趣、课业负担以及澳大利亚政治学会的作用。我们的研究发现：学生对院校的选择基于既有的个人关系而非学校的研究声誉;他们希望更多的课业、更多的方法训练;他们认为奖学金申请的结果根据的不是能力表现;他们认为自己达不到所学领域的课业期待;他们不了解澳大利亚政治学会。本文就个体院系管理方提供给在读和潜在学生的机会和支持提出了一些重要的问题。     

Australia,US torture and the power of international law

ABSTRACT

Australia cooperated extensively with the George W. Bush administration during the ‘war on terror.’ However, in doing so, Australia failed to condemn, and in some instances, condoned US torture and detention programs. Does Australia’s conduct demonstrate a failure of international law and human rights to constrain Australia’s actions? Although the Howard government was heavily criticised for failing to uphold human rights in the fight against terrorism, international law was not forgotten. This article argues that international law shaped Australia’s cooperation with the US. Australia strategically used international laws to legitimise its cooperation with the US in the face of evidence of US torture. International law was not dismissed to pursue national security interests but used to legitimise Australia’s security policies.     

Foucault,realism and the power discourse in international relations

The work of Michel Foucault highlights the need to rethink the assumptions of disciplines such as international relations which have tended to remain narrow, universalist and positivist. In particular, the key concept of power has largely escaped critical inquiry. This article seeks to open up the power discourse in international relations by exploring the limits of traditional approaches such as realism and even critical theory, arguing for a ‘post‐positivist’ approach which incorporates Foucault's insights into the nature of power. Indeed, it goes beyond much of the ‘Third Debate’ in directly focusing on power and rearticulating its form and content as a category of analysis in international relations.