BISA: Group On Diplomacy Call for Papers‏

Dear Colleague, This is a call for panels and papers on any and all aspects of diplomacy for two conventions. First, is BISA's own meeting at Leicester between December 14th and 16th. Details of how to submit proposals can be found at http://www.bisa.ac.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=130-call-for-papers&catid=35-conferences You submit proposals online, but a heads up to me would be much appreciated. Please note the fast approaching deadline of May 1st. Second is the ISA meeting scheduled for February 17th to 20th in New Orleans.Details of that process can be found athttp://www.isanet.org/neworleans2010/call-for-papers.html Submissions go direct to ISA, although a copy (or heads up) to Donna Lee, the program chair for the Diplomatic Studies Section would be very welcome. Remember also that whole panels are always far easier to place than singlepapers. The deadline for submissions to ISA is June 1st. Many thanks Paul SharpProfessor and Head of Political Science302b Cina HallUniversity of Minnesota, DuluthDuluth MN 55812, USA Phone 218 726 6221e mail psharp@d.umn.edufax 218 726 6386 Visiting Senior Fellow, ClingendaelNetherlands Institute of International Relations Co-Editor, Palgrave's "Diplomacy and International Relations" serieshttp://www.palgrave.com/email/diplomacy.htm Co-Editor, Hague Journal of Diplomacywww.brill.nl/hjdHJD@clingendael.nl(online submissions at www.editorialmanager.com/hjd)

BISA Panels at ISA Convention, 2009 (Deadline 1 May)‏

Message forwarded on behalf of Professor Inderjeet Parmar: BISA CALL FOR PROPOSALS FOR 'SET-ASIDE' PANELS AT THE ISA CONVENTION, NEW ORLEANS, 2010 THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN ON THE BISA WEBSITE FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS BUT PLEASE NOTE: We hope colleagues have seen the Call for Papers for ISA's 2010 annual meeting, "Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners," in New Orleans, Louisiana, February 17-20, 2010. To view the Call, please see http://www.isanet.org/neworleans2010/call-for-papers.html As BISA is designated an official Cooperating Organization, the International Studies Association SETS ASIDE for BISA 5 panels at the ISA convention, in addition to the panels individual BISA members may apply for. BISA is now requesting Working Groups to send in applications for the 5 panel slots set-aside by ISA. Normally, Only 1 (ONE) application from any Working Group is permitted in any one year; this must be accompanied by written endorsement from the WG Convenor. The deadline for sending in an application is Friday 1 May 2009 (see further details below). Successful applicants will be notified the following week and must register for the ISA Convention by 15 May 2009 citing "Cooperating Organization" in their application. Typically, an ISA panel includes 4-5 papers along with a panel chair and discussant.According to ISA's new participation rules, participants are allowed to present no more than two papers with a total of four maximum participations, including acting as discussant and chair. Note ISA Guidelines for Participants at the end of the call for papers. Colleagues should also note that all panellists will need to register through the MyISA registration system. This is a fairly easy process! Applicants Should Send the Following: 1. Panel title and rationale of no more than 200 words2. Full list of 4-5 panellists, plus chair and discussant (name, title, university affiliation, email address) 3. Provisional paper titles for each speaker (unless the application is for a Round Table)4. Written consent of the Working Group Convenor for the panel application (an email to that effect is acceptable) Applications should be emailed to: Inderjeet.Parmar@manchester.ac.ukDEADLINE: 1 MAY 2009 Professor Inderjeet ParmarHead of PoliticsVice Chair, British International Studies AssociationPolitics/School of Social SciencesUniversity of ManchesterOxford RoadManchester M13 9PL, UKTelephone 0161 275 3056

BISA: CFP - BI-LAW at BISA 2009 (International Law Working Group)‏

Message sent on behalf of Dr Stephanie Carvin. Call for Papers - BISA International Law Working Group (BI-LAW) BI-LAW welcomes papers or panels on or related to the area of international law for the British International Studies Association's annual conference in Leicester this year (14-16 December). If you have a panel proposal or a paper (which could be assembled into a theme panel), please submit it to the group by 29 April at the latest. For more about BI-LAW, please see www.bi-law.org For more information on the conference, please visit http://www.bisa.ac.uk. Please note that in accordance with BISA's rules, you must be a member to attend or present at the conference. All questions, comments and proposals should be sent to Stephanie.Carvin@rhul.ac.uk Sincerely Stephanie _____________________________________________________Dr. Stephanie CarvinRoyal Holloway, University of Londonhttp://www.rhul.ac.uk/Politics-and-IR/About-Us/Carvin/Index.html

BISA: Cfp Naspir BISA set-aside panel bid ISA New Orleans 2010‏

This year each BISA Working Group can submit a panel for one of 5guaranteed slots at the ISA annual convention in New Orleans. If youwouldlike your panel or roundtable to be considered for a BISA Naspir Working Group bid for such a slot, please let me know ASAP and certainly nolater than 30 April, as the deadline for getting the bid in to BISA is 1 May.If there is more than one bid I will rank, subject to confirmation by the list. The papers/panels/roundtables should relate to the working group's statement of purpose which is as follows:"to promote politics and international relations scholarship whichsupports non-violent action against oppression. We have members around the worldand across academic disciplinary boundaries. We are scholars, students, non-academic activists and interested citizens, with theoretical,empirical and/or campaigning interests." For more on Naspir, go to http://www.naspir.net. Here is a cut and paste of the details from the BISA websitehttp://www.bisa.ac.uk: ****************************************BISA CALL FOR PROPOSALS FOR 'SET-ASIDE' PANELS AT THE ISA CONVENTION,NEWORLEANS, 2010 We hope colleagues have seen the Call for Papers for ISA's 2010 annualmeeting, "Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners," inNew Orleans, Louisiana, February 17-20, 2010. To view the Call, pleaseseehttp://www.isanet.org/neworleans2010/call-for-papers.html As BISA is designated an official Cooperating Organization, theInternational Studies Association SETS ASIDE for BISA 5 panels at theISAconvention, in addition to the panels individual BISA members may applyfor. BISA is now requesting Working Groups to send in applications for the 5panel slots set-aside by ISA. Normally, Only 1 (ONE) application fromanyWorking Group is permitted in any one year; this must be accompanied bywritten endorsement from the WG Convenor. The deadline for sending in an application is Friday 1 May 2009 (seefurther details below). Successful applicants will be notified the following week and mustregisterfor the ISA Convention by 15 May 2009 citing "Cooperating Organization"intheir application. Typically, an ISA panel includes 4-5 papers along with a panel chair anddiscussant.According to ISA's new participation rules, participants are allowed topresent no more than two papers with a total of four maximumparticipations, including acting as discussant and chair. Note ISAGuidelines for Participants at the end of the call for papers. Colleagues should also note that all panellists will need to registerthrough the MyISA registration system. This is a fairly easy process! Applicants Should Send the Following:1. Panel title and rationale of no more than 200 words2. Full list of 4-5 panellists, plus chair and discussant (name,title,university affiliation, email address)3. Provisional paper titles for each speaker (unless theapplication is fora Round Table)4. Written consent of the Working Group Convenor for the panelapplication(an email to that effect is acceptable) Applications should be emailed to: Inderjeet.Parmar@manchester.ac.ukDEADLINE: 1 MAY 2009************************************** bw Eric ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Dr. Eric HerringReader in International PoliticsDepartment of Politics, University of Bristol,10 Priory Road, Bristol, BS8 1TU, United Kingdom.Tel. +44(0)117 9288582. Mobile +44(0)7771 966608.eric.herring@bristol.ac.ukhttp://www.bris.ac.uk/politics

BISA : cfp Naspir Working Group at BISA Dec 09‏

Dear all, The British International Studies Association annual conference istakingplace in Leicester this year 14-16 December. The deadline for submitting paper, panel or roundtable proposals to BISAisFriday 1 May. If you would like to offer a paper or panel under theauspices of the BISA Naspir Working Group, please let me know as soon aspossible and certainly no later than Thursday 30 April, with fullrequireddetails (see below). I will be happy to try to place individual papers. The papers/panels/roundtables should relate to the working group's statement of purpose which is as follows:"to promote politics and international relations scholarship whichsupports non-violent action against oppression. We have members around the worldand across academic disciplinary boundaries. We are scholars, students, non-academic activists and interested citizens, with theoretical,empirical and/or campaigning interests." For more on Naspir, go to http://www.naspir.net. For full details of the conference, go to the BISA websitehttp://www.bisa.ac.uk. BISA's guidelines include the following: For all proposals, I need each person's name, email, institution,address,BISA membership status (currently paid up or not) and BISA membernumber.You must be a BISA member to attend. For panels, you need to include convenor, chair, discussant (optional)anda title and abstract for the panel as a whole. Then you need titles andabstracts for the papers and contact details (as above) for all papergivers. For round tables, you need to include convenor, chair and a title andabstract for the round table as a whole. Then you personal details(asabove) for all participants. The use of discussants in panel proposals is optional. Convenors caninclude them at their discretion. Panels may have either 4 paper giversandno discussant OR 3 paper givers and a discussant. In planning your attendance this year, please also take note of thefollowing points taken from the BISA website: - No single delegate can be involved in more than THREE panels (in acapacity as either a paper-giver, chair or discussant). - Further to this, each delegate is limited to presenting no more thanONEpaper at the conference. - BISA will not accept graduate only panels. At least one paper-givermustbe full-time academic staff. BISA also encourages a range ofinstitutionsbeing represented on a panel. Each Working Group is guaranteed one panel and can propose up to seven,forwhich I would have to propose a ranking (subject to approval by listmembers) so that BISA knows which gets the guaranteed slot. bw Eric ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Dr. Eric HerringReader in International PoliticsDepartment of Politics, University of Bristol,10 Priory Road, Bristol, BS8 1TU, United Kingdom.Tel. +44(0)117 9288582. Mobile +44(0)7771 966608.eric.herring@bristol.ac.ukhttp://www.bris.ac.uk/politics

BISA: CFP: Beyond Critique of Liberal Peace ISA New Orleans 2010‏

Call for Papers: ‘Beyond the Critique of Liberal Peace’ From Susanna Campbell (Tufts), Meera Sabaratnam (LSE), and David Chandler(Westminster) Panel/Roundtable proposal for International Studies Association 51st AnnualConvention, New Orleans, February 17-20, 2010: Theory vs. Policy? ConnectingScholars and Practitioners There may be no better illustration of the theory-policy disconnect than thedebate surrounding the pursuit of ‘liberal peace’ in countries emerging fromwar. Critical scholarly indictments of the pursuit of ‘liberal peace’abound, largely discounting external attempts to create states governed byfree markets, rule of law, and liberal democracy. Prescriptive scholarly andpolicy literature envision improved peacebuilding and statebuilding outcomesthrough alterations in the organization of external interventions (i.e.,through improved coordination, alignment, metrics, analysis, strategy, andadministration). Not only do these literatures largely fail to ‘talk’ to oneanother, but they leave in their wake insufficient empirical investigationof international peacebuilding efforts and a dearth of theories that couldsubstitute for ‘liberal peace’. We are seeking to organize one or two panels and/or roundtables at the ISAConvention in 2010 to discuss the theoretical and empirical validity of theliberal peace critique. Empirically, we seek papers and presentations whichproblematise the assumptions of the liberal peace in practice: does thiscritique fit the practices and concerns of interveners and 'subjects' on theground? Theoretically, we seek papers and presentations which engage withthe assumption that this ‘liberal’ framing of policy and practice is indeedwhat is at stake, and the direction in which critical research in this areashould be developed. Abstracts and full participant details should be sent to thepanel/roundtable conveners Susanna Campbell susanna.campbell@tufts.edu(Tufts), David Chandler (Westminster) D.Chandler@wmin.ac.uk, and MeeraSabaratnam (LSE) M.Sabaratnam@lse.ac.uk by Monday 11th May at the latest. David Chandler, Professor of International Relations, Department of Politicsand International Relations, University of Westminster, 32-38 Wells Street,London, W1T 3UW. Editor, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding. Tel:++44 (0)776 525 3073 Email: D.Chandler@Westminster.ac.uk Personal webpages:http://www.wmin.ac.uk/sshl/page-63-smhp=1

BISA : Call for Papers Working Group on International Relations, Security and Religion‏

BISA 2009 - University of Leicester(Monday 14 December - Wednesday 16 December) International Relations, Security and Religion Working Grouphttp://relwar.wordpress.com/bisa-working-group/ On behalf of the IR, Security and Religion Working Group, we would like to invite 1. Paper submissions for a joint panel or roundtable sponsored by the IR, Security and Religion Working Group with the Gendering, IR and Security Working Group (deadline 25 April 2009)a. Religion, Gender and Security. This panel's focus will be security and how dimensions of gender and religion interact and impact consciously and unconsciously on human, national and international security. In that context, it will seek to explore responses to the dynamic that enhance security. It aims to bring together expertise in gender and in religion, linking the Working Groups on International Relations, Security and Religion with the Working Group on Gendering, IR and Security to generate theoretical and practical outcomes, to inform further research and feed into policy for NGOs, governments and the international community. Convenor: Rosemary Durward, Royal Military Academy Sandhurst Submit papers to: durwardworkinggroup@hotmail.co.uk b. Gendered religious practices, women's human rights, and security: the European context Tensions between the claims of gender equality and religion are well-documented. This is most evident today in 'Muslim headscarf' debates at the nexus of immigration and security discourses, wherein gender equality is often invoked to discredit multicultural policies and apply instead a security lens to the 'challenge of Islam' in Europe and beyond. Equally, the instrumental use of religion to discredit gender equality norms as 'Western' is well documented. At the same time, other EU initiatives are cultivating 'inter-cultural dialogue' as part of a 'soft' approach to averting security threats. These developments raise many questions about the interplay of women's human rights and security concerns. Paper proposals are invited that explore these issues with a particular focus on evolving approaches to security at state and/or EU level. Convenor: Dr. Niamh Reilly, Global Women's Studies Programme, National University of Ireland, GalwaySubmit papers to: niamh.reilly@nuigalway.ie 2. Paper submissions for the following panel at the next BISA Conference in December 2009. (Deadline 20 April 2009) (a) Islam, Human Rights and Security. This panel welcomes papers dealing either theoretically or empirically with human rights and Islam. The recent submissions to the UN Human Rights Council concerning defamation of religion, the efforts of democratisation and reconstruction in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the increasing debates concerning Sharia Law in Western states all highlight the importance of understanding opposing interpretations of human rights. The panel expects to explore contrasts and commonalties between differing interpretations of human rights and point to the security implications of these differences. Convenor: Dr Nicholas Kerton-Johnson, University of BristolSubmit papers to: Nicholas.kerton-johnson@bristol.ac.uk 3. Panel or roundtable proposals for the next BISA conference in December 2009 (4 slots). The IR, Security and Religion Working Group will consider sponsoring panels on any subject in the field of IR, Security and Religion, which might include substantive research and/or theoretical debates. (Deadline 25 April 2009) Panel submissions to Rosemary Durward, RMAS durwardworkinggroup@hotmail.co.uk Convenors 4. Panel or roundtable proposal: You need to include name of convenor, chair, discussant (optional) and a title and abstract for the panel as a whole; Then titles and abstracts for the papers and contact details (see below) for all paper givers. 5. Papers: Include name, e-mail, institution, status, BISA member number and address of all participants in your panel/roundtable. 6. The use of discussants is optional. Convenors can include them at theirdiscretion. We will accept panels with either 4 paper givers and nodiscussant OR 3 paper givers and a discussant. 7. In planning your attendance this year, please take note of the following points taken from the BISA website: - No single delegate can be involved in more than THREE panels (in acapacity as either a paper-giver, chair or discussant).- Further to this, each delegate is limited to presenting no more than ONEpaper at the conference.- BISA will not accept graduate only panels. At least one paper-giver mustbe full-time academic staff. BISA also encourages a range of institutionsbeing represented on a panel. NB If you are not a member of the Working Group we are happy to acceptyour proposal as long as you confirm your intention to join. Co-Convenors; Rosemary Durward, RMAS & Sara Silvestri, City Universitye-mail: durwardworkinggroup@hotmail.co.uk BRITISH INTERNATIONAL STUDIES ASSOCIATION www.bisa.ac.ukThe BISA-list is for BISA members onlyTo unsubscribe, send message "unsubscribe bisa-list" to majordomo@bham.ac.uk.To post a message, send message to bisa-list@bham.ac.uk.

BISA: cfp ISA 2010 New Orleans 'Historical Materialism and Security'‏

CALL FOR PAPERSISA 2010 NEW ORLEANS'HISTORICAL MATERIALISM AND SECURITY' This is a call for individual papers (which I will try to place on panels), standard panels, innovate panels (details below) and workshops (details below) for the next International Studies Association annual convention in New Orleans 17-20 February 2010. Seehttp://www.isanet.org/neworleans2010/call-for-papers.html which includes full guidelines for participants. Some of the ISA rules and procedures have changed since last year. An overview of the key points is below. DEADLINES The deadline for submission of panel and roundtable proposals to the ISA is 1 June 2009. However, it seems that the ISA has an early deadline of 15 May for innovative panel proposals (see below). It also seems that ISA has a later deadline of 15 June 2009 for working group proposals (see below) but if you are going to go down that route I suggest you check with ISA to confirm. In all cases, the more time I have to coordinate the better. THEME The proposed theme is historical materialism and security. I would be keen to have proposals from a variety of angles exploring the value (and limitations) of HM for understanding the theories and practices of security. Possible angles on the theme might include:- Expositions of how HM has already been applied to security by scholars and practitioners in languages other than English.- Application of particular HM concepts (e.g. dialectic, alienation, class, class struggle and so on) to debates or issues in security.- Showing how particular issues (arms production, the arms trade, state terrorism, energy security, etc.), cases (Latin American Left, the US role in Afghanistan, etc.) or debates (the development-security nexus etc.) can be better understood using an HM, possibly as opposed to a realist, liberal or post-structuralist perspective.- (Re)invigorating versions of Security Studies such as Critical Security Studies, Human Security Studies or Peace Studies with HM ideas.- The current global financial crisis and responses to it as a crisis of class security.- Consideration of the ontological, epistemological and methodological dimensions of the above, perhaps through the application of critical realism.- Application of neo-Marxist/neo-HM approaches to the above.- Post-Marxist/post-HM work which questions the value of HM for understanding the above.- Addressing the issue of the relationship between HM scholars and practitioners in line with the convention theme of 'Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners'. ONGOING PROJECT My intention is to have this as an ongoing project, including publication:- For ISA 2009 in New York I submitted a bid for four panels each with four papers and a discussant. One was accepted: this went well and afterwards some of us had a good discussion about continuing and I indicated that I was happy to coordinate these activities.- Since ISA, I have completed a chapter on HM, security and Security Studies for the second edition of Alan Collins (ed.) 'Contemporary Security Studies' (Oxford University Press) which will be published in late 2009/early 2010. If anyone would like a copy of this chapter, please let me know.- I have had expressions of interest in principle from 'Security Dialogue' and 'Global Society' for a possible special issue, from 'International Political Sociology' for a possible running theme across multiple issues. What will get submitted to each journal will (obviously) depend on its fit with the remit of the particular journal.- Looking further ahead, I intend to bid for a European Consortium for Political Research workshop at their joint sessions of workshops which will take place in St. Gallen, Switzerland in March or April 2011 (a long time away but the earliest available and the deadline for bidding for this is 1 February 2010). SPONSORSHIP BY ISA SECTIONS OR VIA BISA Likelihood of acceptance is increased by sponsorship by two and failing that one ISA sections. The most obvious for us are International Political Sociology, International Security and Foreign Policy Analysis, though others may be relevant. Please feel free to approach the relevant section personnel. I am also willing to try to encourage section sponsorship. Likelihood of acceptance is also increased if the panel is a panel on the convention theme of 'Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners'. This year each British International Studies Association Working Group can submit a panel for one of 5 guaranteed slots at ISA New Orleans. If you would like your panel or rountable to be considered for a BISA Network of Activist Scholars of Politics and International Relations (Naspir) Working Group bid for such a slot, please let me know ASAP (I'm the convenor) and certainly no later than 30 April, as the deadline for getting the bid in to BISA is 1 May. If there is more than one bid I will rank, subject to confirmation by the Naspir list. Full details are on the BISA website http://www.bisa.ac.uk. If you are not familiar with Naspir, you may wish to have a look at http://www.naspir.net. GOOD MIX OF PARTICIPANTS ISA advise: "Panel organizers should strive for a good mix of participants. The best panels often include scholars from different countries, a range of institutions, and different career stages." PARTICIPANTS FROM OUTSIDE NORTH AMERICA ISA advise: "Panel and roundtable chairs are encouraged to invite the participation of relevant scholars outside of North America. Letters confirming the participation of scholars from outside North America should be sent by the program chair(s) at the earliest possible date and, whenever possible, in advance of the publication of the preliminary program. If participation of a scholar from outside North America is contingent on funding from ISA or other sources, that fact should be made clear when the proposal is submitted." PAPERS, PANELS AND ROUNDTABLES If you offer and individual paper, I will try to place it on a panel, etc. Panel proposals must have a chair, one or two discussants and four papers to maximize the probability of acceptance by the ISA. If you assemble part of a panel, let me know and I will see if I have other papers that can complete it. ISA advise "The best discussants are often scholars with significant experience in the field. In general, graduate students should not fill this role." Roundtables are less favoured by ISA than panels. Roundtable presentations should still have a title per participant. Roundtables must have a chair and five or six participants. PARTICIPATION LIMITS Only two paper presentations per person will be accepted by the ISA (if it is the same as last year - I can't find confirmation on the ISA website - this two presentation rule applies also applies roundtables). There is a maximum total of four participations of any kind (e.g. acting as a discussant or chair). If the same approach is taken as last year (I can't find confirmation on the ISA website), these rules apply to all participants, irrespective of their geographical origin and co-authorship of a paper counts as a half-participation. INNOVATIVE PANELS I would be keen for participants to consider using an innovative approach. The following was circulated by the ISA Foreign Policy section: "Innovative panels allow participants to engage in dialogue with colleagues who share a common interest. These panels can be set up as a "town hall" meeting, they could use a debate format, or they might include short presentations from participants followed by a moderated discussion with the audience. These panels might also involve the use of technology not ordinarily afforded to traditional panels as well. Essentially, ISA is offering us the potential to use a time slot at the convention in creative and experimental ways to move beyond the traditional panel experience. There were 19 innovative panels accepted for the 2008 meeting and 11 for the 2009 meeting. Final panel proposals are due to ISA by May 15, 2009. Proposals should include the panel title, abstract, participant names and email addresses along with your requested room set-up and technology requests. In addition to thequality of the panel proposal itself, ISA will consider diversity in section representation and costs associated with the panel. Andrea Gerlak, the Director of Academic Development at ISA, is the main contact for these opportunities. She is also willing to provide feedback as you develop proposals. Andrea's email address is agerlak@email.arizona.edu. " To view a listing of innovative panels from ISA's 2008 and 2009 meetings, please seehttp://isanet.ccit.arizona.edu/neworleans2010/Innovative_Panels_Info.pdf WORKING GROUPS I would also be keen for participants to consider using an innovative approach. The following was circulated by the ISA Foreign Policy section: "Working Groups are organized so that participants meet at three times during the conference: (1) for a full day on the Tuesday before traditional panels begin, (2) midway through the conference for a 1-2 hour meeting, and (3) a final 1-2 hour meeting toward the end of the conference. ISA assists with the room arrangements, technology needs, lunch for the Tuesday all-day meeting, and the facilitation of a blog for the WG in advance of the meeting. Final panel proposals are due to ISA by June 15, 2009. Proposals should include the Working Group title, project description, Group Coordinator details, and a rough schedule for group meetings. In addition to the quality of the proposal itself, ISA will consider the diversity of section representation, thematic integration across sections, and linkages to the program theme. Andrea Gerlak, the Director of Academic Development at ISA, is the main contact for these opportunities. She is also willing to provide feedback as you develop proposals. Andrea's email address is agerlak@email.arizona.edu." To view a description of the Working Group Initiative and descriptions of those accepted for the 2009 meeting, please see http://www.isanet.org/isa_working_groups/ ****************************************** I do hope that you will participate. Also, if you could forward this email to anyone who might be interested, that would be great. Best wishes Eric ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Dr. Eric HerringReader in International PoliticsDepartment of Politics, University of Bristol,10 Priory Road, Bristol, BS8 1TU, United Kingdom.Tel. +44(0)117 9288582. Mobile +44(0)7771 966608.eric.herring@bristol.ac.ukhttp://www.bris.ac.uk/politics

BISA: SAID CFP Annual BISA conference‏

BISA Sovereignty And Its Discontents Group Call for Papers Annual BISA conference, Leicester, 14-16 December 2009 We welcome paper proposals from research students and established academics,working in the fields of IR theory, strategic studies and the history ofideas, on the broad themes identified below for the SAID panels at thisyear's annual BISA conference. * New Sovereigntism to New Idealism? President Obama has promised re-engagement with America's allies and theworld, in contrast to the 'new sovereigntism' of the Bush Administration,characterised by Peter J. Spiro in his 2000 'Foreign Affairs' article as thespurning of international law and multilateral engagement in favour ofdefending American exceptionalism and national interests. The 'newsovereigntism', backed by conservative legal scholars and think-tanks,claimed that the American legal system and liberal democracy wasincompatible with the demands of global constitutionalism and newdevelopments in international law. This panel will examine the substance ofthe case put forward by the new sovereigntists. Possible questions to explore include: * Is 'sovereigntism' necessarily a conservative project? * Can an abstract 'sovereigntism' represent a coherent intellectualposition?* Is 'sovereigntism' only applicable to the USA and / or Western liberaldemocracies, or does it have wider lessons for states in general? * Does the end of globalism in the current economic crisis offer newpossibilities for sovereigntism in international affairs? * Has the new sovereigntism had any lasting impact on American foreignaffairs? * The return of realism? Realist thinkers have drawn attention to the rise of new great powers inAsia and the spectre of economic protectionism to argue for the inevitablereturn of power politics to international affairs, and the need for realisttheory to grasp these developments - a case put forward by Robert Kagan asawakening from the globalist 'dreams' of the 1990s. In the meantime, some ofthe most astute criticisms of the irrationality and purposelessness ofAmerican foreign policy and strategy since the end of the Cold War,including the invasion of Iraq and the war on terror, have variously comefrom realist thinkers such as Edward Luttwak, Henry Kissinger, ZbigniewBrzezinski and Andrew Bacevich. Despite the idealist rhetoric of the ObamaAdministration, the American war effort in Afghanistan is retreating frombuilding beacons of democracy to the simple pursuit of stability. Do the'happy 1990s' described by Mary Kaldor represent a twenty year detour frompower politics? Does the recent disciplinary re-appraisal of classicalrealism pave the way for the return of a more nuanced and sophisticatedrealist thought? Possible topics for paper proposals may include: * Is there a coherent and general realist critique of the strategies pursuedin the war on terror?* Does the new pragmatism of the American war effort signal a dangerousabandonment of democratic political ideals?* Does the normative re-appraisal of realist thinkers such as Hobbes, Carrand Morgenthau offer possibilities for better grasping recent developmentsin international order? * Does Obama's foreign policy vision signify a return to pragmatism, or adifferent iteration of the Wilsonian idealism of the Bush Administration?* How successful and important is the re-appraisal of classical realistthinkers such as E.H. Carr, Reinhold Niebuhr and Hans Morgenthau in anycontemporary return to realist thought? If you would like to propose a paper on any of these themes, please submitthe following information to Philip Cunliffe atpoliticswithoutsovereignty@gmail.com before FRIDAY 24 APRIL 2009: 1. Paper title and abstract of no more than 200 words.2. Your contact details, including institution, email, postal address andBISA membership number

'Foucault: 25 Years On' provisional conference program‏

FYI, information on the forthcoming Foucault conference at the University of South Australia on June 25, including abstracts and bios. I believe that the conference proceedings will later be available online (refereed papers). For more information see http://www.unisa.edu.au/hawkeinstitute/cps/ news.asp Foucault: 25 years onThe Centre for Post-Colonial Studies and Globalisation is marking the 25th anniversary of the death of Michel Foucault with a conference to reflect on the influence of his work. Provocation:Twenty five years after his death, reflecting on Foucault is an enormous task. His influence permeates disparate and innumerable fields and informs so much of our thinking, along with that of many great theorists who have followed him. Foucault’s influence is one of ramifying and far reaching interdisciplinary complexity, but he draws us together too, providing a common theoretical baseline to diverse disciplinary endeavours. He shows us the connections between things. Just as his life and his work connects up theoretical pursuits as diverse as queer theory and postcolonial studies, so his influence draws together and draws bridges between theorists. In so doing, Foucault’s legacy muddies the theoretical waters, forcing strange synergies and theoretical configurations such as the antifoundational humanist. Growing from the murky ferment of French colonial history, the father of poststructuralism’s story is as complex as that encounter, and his legacy is as mutating, unsettling and transformative. A reflection on Foucault needs to accommodate a consideration of the enormity of the shadow which such a legacy casts over continuing intellectual production. ABSTRACTS & BIOS  BARRY HINDESS KEYNOTE: Liberalism and HistoryBarry Hindess is Professor of Political Science in the Research School of Social Sciences at ANU. He has published widely in the areas of social and political theory. His most recent works are Discourses of power: from Hobbes to Foucault, Governing Australia: studies in contemporary rationalities of government (with Mitchell Dean), Corruption and democracy in Australia and Us and them: anti- elitism in Australia (with Marian Sawer). He has published numerous papers on democracy, liberalism and empire, and neo-liberalism.  IAN GOODWIN-SMITH Foucault: 25 Years onTwenty five years after his death, reflecting on Foucault is an enormous task. His influence permeates disparate and innumerable fields and informs so much of our thinking, along with that of many great theorists who have followed him. Foucault’s influence is one of ramifying and far reaching interdisciplinary complexity, but he draws us together too, providing a common theoretical baseline to diverse disciplinary endeavours. He shows us the connections between things. Just as his life and his work connects up theoretical pursuits as diverse as queer theory and postcolonial studies, so his influence draws together and draws bridges between theorists. In so doing, Foucault’s legacy muddies the theoretical waters, forcing strange synergies and theoretical configurations such as the antifoundational humanist. Growing from the murky ferment of French colonial history, the father of poststructuralism’s story is as complex as that encounter, and his legacy is as mutating, unsettling and transformative. A reflection on Foucault needs to accommodate a consideration of the enormity of the shadow which such a legacy casts over continuing intellectual production.Ian Goodwin-Smith is a lecturer in social theory and social policy at the University of South Australia. His research interests orbit around an intersection of postcolonial theory and social policy. He has a particular interest in new theoretical directions for progressive politics with a focus on culture, social identity, subjectivity and social democratic citizenship, as well as an interest in critiques of expertise and professionalism.  BEN GOLDER Foucault, Anti-Humanism and Human RightsResponding to recent engagements with Foucault, and in part to the provocation of this conference, this paper argues that in his late work Foucault does not submit to the ‘moral superiority’ of humanism and introduce a liberal humanist subject. Rather, Foucault’s late investigations of subjectivity constitute a continuation and not a radical departure from his earlier positions on the subject. Such a reading helps us to assess Foucault’s late supposed ‘embrace’ of, or return to, human rights, which is here re-interpreted as a critical anti-humanist engagement with human rights, conducted in the name of an unfinished humanity. In this way, the paper engages not only with the way in which mainstream accounts of human rights tend to assimilate anti-foundational and post- structural challenges, but also with the quality of Foucault’s own political legacy and future in the age of human rights, 25 years on.Ben Golder is a lecturer in the Faculty of Law, UNSW, with an interest in legal theory and post-structuralist philosophy. He has written several articles on Foucault and is, with Professor Peter Fitzpatrick, the author and editor, respectively, of Foucault’s Law (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009) and Foucault and Law (under contract with Ashgate, to come out in 2010).  JIM JOSE De-radicalising Foucault: Governance Discourse and the Taming of Foucault?The paper explores the alleged links between contemporary understandings and uses of ‘governance’ and Foucault’s ideas. Scholars working in quite diverse disciplines have asserted, with increasing frequency, their debt to Foucault for the idea of ‘governance’. However, it is doubtful that Foucault ever used the word ‘governance’, or that he would have accepted having his ideas grouped under that term. This paper argues that positing Foucault as an intellectual progenitor of the concept of ‘governance’ conflates two quite different and incompatible discourses. The political effect is to undermine the emancipatory impulse embedded within Foucault’s political philosophy. In effect, this serves to reposition him within a framework that de-radicalises his intellectual legacy and renders him safe for mainstream scholarship.Jim Jose is Associate Professor in Politics at the University of Newcastle. He is the author of Biopolitics of the Subject: an Introduction to the Ideas of Michel Foucault (1998) and articles on political theory, feminist theory, and Australian politics. His research interests include political theory, governance and post- colonialism.  BRURIA BERGMAN & THOMAS NORDGRENDisambiguating the Prague TrialThrough his media studies, Michel Foucault has liberated retrenched viewpoints by showing how the assumptions underlying specific systemic structures open those structures to manipulation for purposes of influence, subjugation, punishment and elimination (cf. death). This paper applies Foucault's methods to the examination of an exhaustively exhumed Czechoslovakian ‘show trial’ of the 1950s, informally termed the ‘Slansky Trial’. Dr. Bergman, one of the co- authors, recently published another paper entitled ‘The Prague Trial – a Pre1967 Verifactory Case in the Study of Contemporary Anti- Semitism Camouflaged as Anti-Zionism, and Pointers towards Undoing the Camouflage’. Through demonstrating the anti-democratic/anti- Semitic nature of the Slansky Trial, the authors hope to enable long- closed democratic mechanisms to reassert their primacy in contemporary Czech culture and promote the idea that such analyses might be carried to other nodes of injustice as well.Bruria Bergman received her PhD from the Middle Eastern Department of the University of Melbourne where she redefined Metaphor in terms of Semiotics and Mathematics with examples from Hebrew Literature. Her thesis was examined by Thomas Seobok, Editor of Semiotica. She earlier obtained a major in Modern European history from La Trobe University.Thomas Nordgren received his Ph.D. from the English Department of the University of Houston, where he specialized in postmodernism and rhetorical analysis. He retired in 2006 as Senior Lecturer in Rhetoric and Contemporary Literature from the Humanities Department at the University of Wisconsin-Platteville.  DAVID MCINERNEY Oriental Despotism and the Political Monsters of Michel Foucault's ‘Les Anormaux’On 29 January 1975 Foucault spoke of two figures of the Despot in revolutionary France, one of them incestuous (the king), the other cannibalistic (the crowd). The figure of the Despot constitutes a norm of political conduct, if we understand the ‘normal’ as constituted in its relation to its spectral, abnormal ‘Others’. In 1959 Foucault’s tutor Louis Althusser had suggested that the ‘Oriental despot’ was a spectre or 'scarecrow' (épouvantail) constitutive of Western political thought. Foucault's lecture, on the other hand, suggests something of a specific mode through which these figures suddenly assumed a material form. This paper extends these theses through an analysis of how James Mill articulated his political theory in The History of British India (1818) around the thesis that 'the fear of insurrection' constitutes the necessary impetus for the movement from 'semi-barbarous' to 'civilized' society.David McInerney is a Lecturer at the University of South Australia’s School of Communication, International Studies and Languages. He is completing a book on James Mill for publication in 2009, and has been involved in the borderlands project since 1996, including editing a 2005 special issue of borderlands e-journal (Althusser & Us).  KATRINA JAWORSKI Deliberate Taking: The Author, Agency and SuicideIn the essay ‘What is an Author?’, Michel Foucault contends that ‘the author does not precede the works’. If this is the case, then what happens when the notion of the author as never outside discourse is grafted to suicide? What happens when suicide – most commonly defined as a deliberate taking of one’s life – is read through the idea that the one who is doing the taking does not precede it? Does this not obliterate agency in suicide: the key ingredient necessary to marking the individual as the sole author of their death? I respond to the questions by first considering what Foucault’s contention might offer to understanding the constitution of agency in the act of suicide. I then draw on elements of Judith Butler’s work to consider a way of thinking of suicide, which furthers Foucault’s contribution. I suggest that positioning suicide as already part of discourse does not undermine the individual as the author of death, or makes the act of taking one’s life any less deliberate. I conclude with a comment on Foucault’s position on death being power’s limit, and what this might mean for understanding suicide.Katrina Jaworski works as a researcher in the Divisions of Health Sciences and Education, Arts and Humanities, University of South Australia. Her research interests include: gender, bodies, death, dying and suicide in particular.  MARTIN HARDIE From Barthes to Foucault and beyond – Cycling in the Age of EmpireCycling is a game in flux. It is not the myth or an epic as Roland Barthes wrote. Mont Ventoux is a moonscape, bare, barren and rising out of the lavender plains of Provence. They are no longer heroes of epic proportions but bare life, homo sacer competing for all to see in the desert of the real. The precarity of this existence better depicts the state of the peloton today: free as the birds to soar to the greatest heights Simpson, Pantani, Armstrong et al … the list is endless; but free to be shot down at a whim. Cycling has always been an assemblage and a line of flight – from the factory, the farm, from the peloton itself. Cycling finds itself in the eye of the storm as the processes of globalisation seek to reform it in their own image. On the frontline is the very body of the cyclist – this is the object of control. We need to contextualise the globalisation of professional cycling in the age of Armstrong and the successive doping crisis as events which signify the coming of Empire and the permanent state of exception.Martin Hardie has managed bands and worked in Aboriginal Art and Craft centres. He has been a solicitor and a barrister. He has also been an advisor to various members of the former East Timorese resistance and government, a university lecturer, a cyclist, cycling journalist and team manager. He now teaches law at the School of Law at Deakin University.  MICHAEL DUTTON KEYNOTE: 911 and the Afterlives of Colonial GovernmentalityBeginning in Hong Kong with the treatment of the SARS virus and moving quickly onto 911 in New York, the paper argues that two quite distinct renditions of power are captured in these two events. One refers back to concerns of population while the other is locked into what Foucault refers to as the ‘Nietzschian-repressive’ hypothesis. Together these two forms re-emerge, somewhat paradoxically in a formation known as ‘colonial governmentality’ (Scott, Prakash, etc). This notion is inspired by the Saidian binary (Europe and its other), but simultaneously recognises the power of Foucault’s focus on the correct distribution of people and things. Joined as a form of governmentality, the lessons of the colonial offer new insights not just into the colonial past but more importantly into our modern world. This form of power further complicates the already detailed work undertaken by many on questions of power, sovereignty and politics.Professor Michael Dutton is the Research Professor of Political Cultures at the Griffith Asia Institute and Professor of Politics at Goldsmiths, University of London. He was the founding co-editor of the journal Postcolonial Studies and has written extensively in journals such as Public Culture, Social Text and Positions. His books include Policing and Punishment in China (CUP 1992), Streetlife China (CUP 1999), and Policing Chinese Politics: A History (Duke 2005). The last of these books won the American Asian Studies Association Levenson Prize for the best book on contemporary China in 2007. His most recent book is co-authored. Called Beijing Time, it was published by Harvard UP in 2008.  ALEXANDER LAMBEVSKI Discipline, Resistance and Emotions: Subjectivity and Freedom in the Works of Gay, Lesbian and Queer Followers of FoucaultDavid Halperin’s brave book What Do Gay Men Want? (2007) is a paradigmatic example of the struggle that so many ‘Foucauldian’ lesbian, gay and queer scholars have had with the various ways in which Foucault’s work tends to efface (emotional) experience, agency/ subjectivity, meaning, and (the possibility of) relative freedom from the arbitrary rule of various discourses. The passionate queer scholars’ embrace of Foucault’s refusal to provide a model of subjectivity (for fear of contaminating their analyses with the insidious disciplining and normalising effects of psychology) has resulted in a virtual embargo on any meaningful investigation of queer subjectivities. Using as points of departure Halperin’s book and Foucault’s references in The Use of Pleasure to the importance of emotions to the subject’s surrender to or resistance to disciplinary power, this paper will outline the usefulness of microsociology and interactional ritual theories for building a non- normative, sociological model of queer subjectivity.Alexander Lambevski is a founding editor and publisher of Sextures, an online international refereed academic journal for sexualities, cultures and politics, and an independent scholar from Sydney. He has published numerous refereed journal articles and book chapters, and currently is working on a book on queer emotions and sexual citizenship.  STEPHEN KERRY Are You a Boy or a Girl? Foucault and the Intersex MovementThe world’s first intersex organisation, the Turner’s Syndrome Association of Australia, formed in 1983. It is at that time, a year prior to Foucault’s death, we witness the first stirrings which echo Foucault’s articulations. The Intersex Movement coalesced around an articulation of the voice that challenges modern medicine’s power to name and diagnose counter normative bodies. This author is not the first to argue that the Intersex Movement’s call to arms is the literal embodiment of poststructuralism, queer theory and Foucault. The interplay between lived experiences, bio-power and theory has been articulated within the narratives, actions and theorisation of intersex individuals and their peers. In the author’s recent study of Intersex Australians one individual locates Foucault in their life and their re-conceptualisation of sex and gender: Foucault ‘taught me that binary classifications are only one means to order the world’. This paper will explore how the Intersex Movement has reclaimed the subjugated knowledges of their bodies.Stephen Kerry employs feminist, gender and queer theories to understand and give a voice to those people who live on the margins of sex, gender and sexuality. As a queer identifying Buddhist Trekkie, Stephen has brought theory into practice through 20 years of participation in student and queer activism and volunteering for not- for-profit peer support organisations. Stephen is a lecturer in the Sociology Department at Flinders University.  KATE SEYMOUR Problematisations: Violence Intervention and the Construction of ExpertiseFoucault’s (2007: 141) ‘history of problematizations’ draws attention to the ways in which ‘things’ become ‘problems’. This paper focuses on the dichotomisation and categorisation of violence as, either, ‘serious’/‘abnormal’ (non-gendered) violence or gendered (‘domestic’ violence), reflecting the transformation of some forms of violence into problem violence. Evident here, based on the findings of an exploratory study of the ways in which practitioners who work with male perpetrators of violence construct and understand violence, is the creation of particular realms of intervention, divided along disciplinary lines, each associated with distinct domains of knowledge, authority and expertise. In the process certain behaviours are ‘claimed’ as the ‘territory’ of a professional group. As emphasised by Foucault (2007: 71), ‘for knowledge to function as knowledge it must exercise power’. Expertise thus performs a powerful, exclusionary function, controlling who can speak authoritatively about an issue. It is argued that this partitioning of certain behaviours, as representing particular ‘types’ of problem and particular ‘types’ of people, and the ‘territory’ of some professional groups and not others, reflects the broader context of (gendered) power and disciplinary knowledge and has significant implications for the ways in which male violence is conceptualised, named and addressed.As a qualified social worker, Kate Seymour has worked extensively in the areas of child protection, public housing, vocational rehabilitation and correctional services (with adult offenders). She commenced her current role, as a lecturer in criminology and justice studies with Charles Sturt University in NSW, in 2004. Kate’s research interest and activity is focused on gender and violence, specifically the relationships between masculinities, power, sexuality and violence.  DEIRDRE TEDMANSON & DINESH WADIWEL The Governmentality of New Race / Pleasure Wars? Foucault, ‘Neoptolemus’ and the NT EmergencyIn the ‘Society Must be Defended’ lectures, Foucault notes that ‘the problem of war’ is linked to the state’s bio-political power to destroy not only political adversaries, but also ‘the enemy race’ (1976: 257). This paper conceptualises the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER) as a novel form of racialised combat: a form of neoptolemus or ‘new war’. The paper argues that new configurations of race/pleasure wars reinforce elements of biopower and population management foundationally connected to sovereignty within the Western tradition (Foucault, 1976; Agamben, 1998). The paper suggests that there is a correlation between new governmentalised bureaucratic regimes of race war and the prurient, sexualized and intensely moralizing national public discourse about the NTER. The regimes of legitimation, violence and racialisation that accompany Western sovereignty, also inculcate economies of pleasure connected to sex, sexuality and reproduction that are defined and decided upon through a law of continuing racial domination.Deirdre Tedmanson is a lecturer at the School of Psychology, Social Work and Social Policy at the University of South Australia. Deirdre is a core researcher for the Hawke Research Institute for Sustainable Societies and actively involved with its Social Policy Research Group.Dinesh Wadiwel is an adjunct researcher at the Hawke Research Institute for Sustainable Societies Social Policy Research Group. Dinesh currently heads a national non government peak disability organization.  HELEN MCLAREN The Challenge with Foucauldian-Informed Feminist Poststructuralist Discourse AnalysisThis paper discusses the challenges that the author faced when using poststructuralist feminist interpretations of Foucauldian discourse analysis as a research methodology, which emphasised the enmeshment of the researcher’s subjective self in the research. Analysis of the 'self' involved the author being stripped of her ‘creative role and analysed as a complex variable function of discourse’ (Foucault 1977, p. 138). In a struggle to deconstruct personal 'truths', the author repeatedly questioned her multiple subjective positions and life narratives and continually checked these against feminist concepts within literature, with colleagues and research participants. Sensitivity towards personal 'truth', and the author’s power over the interpretation of data, became an object of discourse analysis in its own right. This paper argues that reflexive engagement strengthened the discourse analysis through broadening the author’s own discursively defined views and by exposing how constructions and subjective experiences interacted with research.Helen McLaren is a lecturer at the School of Psychology, Social Work and Social Policy at the University of South Australia. Her key research interests have centred on oppression, exclusion, disadvantage, inequity, shame, blame and silencing. Helen has used victims of sexual abuse, domestic violence and bad heteronormative relationships as vehicles in which to view these phenomena.  TERRY EYSSENS Exception? What Exception? Foucault’s State of ConventionThe notion of the ‘state of exception’ (i.e. the sovereign decision to suspend some or all of the suite of rights, freedoms and obligations associated with the social contract) understands that such rights and obligations normally exist and function as protections. Giorgio Agamben’s work figures the contract suite’s institutionalised presence in terms of this conceptualisation, and then contemplates a permanent state of exception. However, in Foucault’s work on ‘governmentality’, the contract suite functions as a conceptual veneer in the service of the state’s self- preservation, rather than as protection for citizens. This perspective has implications for the usefulness of the notion of the exception as a way of understanding modern political obligation and authority. It is in this context that anti-foundationalist synergies between Foucault, Hume and others will be considered, particularly with regard to the role of convention in a governmentalist understanding of the relation between citizens and the state.Terry Eyssens is a Doctoral Researcher and teacher in Philosophy at the University of Ballarat. His research is focussed on the state’s monopoly on politics and political positions in contemporary society, and on questions around the possibility of politics without the state.  JACK ROBERTS A Genealogy of Public Relations in the Context of WarFoucault’s genealogical critiques of liberalism in the 1970s inspired a whole school of thought which is now known as post- Foucauldian governmentality theory. Recent debates on the ethics of public relations (PR) have centred on problems of ‘truth’ and the ‘public interest’ especially with regard to the Iraq War (2003-). How can this theory be adapted to the important study of the contemporary role of PR in war? Nikolas Rose and Mitchell Dean have proposed that liberal ‘technologies’ of government such as PR can be understood by mapping out historical transformations in liberalism. The history of PR that discussed in this paper may not neatly fit into their schema. Nevertheless, the author argues that by using it to analyse the genealogy of PR and how it has constituted ‘the truth’ and ‘the public’, we can gain a very satisfying understanding of the contemporary role that PR plays in war.Jack Roberts is currently undertaking PhD research aimed at developing a Foucauldian framework for understanding the role of public relations in war and using a case study of Australia and the War on Terror in 2002-2003.  MATTHEW CHRULEW Foucault’s Genealogy of Christianity in the Return of ReligionFor all Foucault’s influence in the humanities and social sciences, including theology and biblical studies, a number of factors (including decisions on publication and norms of interpretation) have meant that his genealogy of Christianity as confessional and pastoral apparatus has rarely been taken into proper account. For all its flaws and incompleteness, Foucault provides a valuable analysis of Christianity’s unique and shifting regime of subjectification and its persistence and modification in secular modes of governance. Today, religion has once again become a central topic of theoretical debates. Amid widespread discussion of the theologico-political and the legacy of Paul, Christianity is presented as self-deconstructing religion or essential touchstone of radical politics. This paper will provide a number of reasons why Foucault’s fragmented and recursive genealogy of Christianity is still an important resource for this debate.Matthew Chrulew is a PhD candidate in the Centre for Studies in Religion and Theology at Monash University. From July he will be a postdoctoral fellow at the Centre for Research in Social Inclusion at Macquarie University. He has published essays on animal studies, Foucault, and biblical studies, as well as a number of short stories.  RATNAM ALAGIAH & JANEK RATNATUNGA Theories About Theories: Accounting Theories After FoucaultFoucault’s works demonstrate how power creates knowledge, how knowledge creates power, and how ‘the human’ is both the object of knowledge and is also subject to knowledge. Applying Foucault’s genealogy, we analyse a series of discourses present within accounting about income. Income is regulated by the institution of social welfare in Australia, leading to the creation of the ‘poor’ who are then categorised, marginalised, excluded and ultimately, controlled. Only as we understand this historical process, of how we have come to be as a society, are we able to liberate human intelligence from its shackles.Ratnam is a lecturer in accounting at the University of South Australia. He specialises in financial accounting, company accounting, accounting theory and international accounting, and has research interests in the impact of a single global currency on accounting, international accounting and in critical perspectives on accounting.Professor Ratnatunga joined the School of Commerce at the University of South Australia as Head in February 2009. Previously he was the Chair in Business Accounting at Monash University, a position he held for eighteen years. His research interests are very wide and he has worked in the profession as a Chartered Accountant with KPMG, and has been a consultant to the World Bank on a number of international projects  MATTHEW BALLPolicing the Use of ‘Foucault’: Three Case Studies from Legal Education ScholarshipThis paper will outline the first three major research projects that adopt Foucault’s work to understand Australian legal education, and will consider each of these as case studies through which the ‘use’ of Foucault can be investigated. While remaining sensitive to the many potential readings and uses of Foucault’s ‘tool- box’, as well as his problematisation of the author as an organising tool of discourse, this paper will demonstrate that the way researchers unify and understand Foucault as an author, and what they seek to do with their own research, has an important effect on how they use his work. In addition, these particular case studies offer an opportunity to consider the introduction of Foucault’s concepts to a discipline that is notoriously insular and hesitant in its engagement with interdisciplinary thinking, and examine this intersection of theoretical perspectives in numerous ways.Matthew Ball is an associate lecturer in the School of Justice at Queensland University of Technology. His doctoral research used Foucault’s work to understand the production of the legal identity at three Australian law schools. Matthew’s other major research interest is examining violence within male same-sex intimate partnerships.  LEONIE MCKEON Learning to Speak Mandarin and Understanding Chinese culture is Different not DifficultLearning Mandarin is considered to be difficult, and acquiring a deep understanding of Chinese culture is thought to be near to impossible. The author has redesigned the conventional way Mandarin is taught so that learners are able to speak Mandarin with confidence very quickly. This method of learning Mandarin helps participants to understand Chinese cultural rules and therefore to be able to behave appropriately in a business context with Chinese people. The author has identified and applied some key points of Michel Foucault’s works that have influenced the theoretical underpinning of her business, Chinese Language and Cultural Advice (CLCA). Foucault’s works on discourse and power and knowledge have enabled the author to develop a teaching methodology which makes Mandarin and Chinese culture easily learnable and therefore accessible.Leonie McKeon lived in Taiwan where she studied Mandarin, taught English as a second language and edited a series of children’s ESL books. She returned to Australia and studied Anthropology, which included studies of Michel Foucault’s works. In 1998 she won an entrepreneurial scholarship to commence her business Chinese Language and Cultural Advice (CLCA)  STEVEN HODGE A Foucauldian Strategy for Vocational Education and Training ResearchVocational education and training (VET) is an area of research dominated by positivist approaches. Such approaches complement the behaviourist educational philosophy known as ‘competency-based training’ (CBT) that underpins Australia’s VET system. This paper reflects on a quandary encountered by researchers examining the history of competency-based education at a TAFE institution in South Australia. The issue was how to account for a series of mutations in the way CBT was understood and practiced that subverted the largely unquestioned expectation of progress. The researchers found that Foucault’s ‘genealogical’ approach allowed for the construction of a mode of intelligibility which lends the history a disturbing coherence. At the centre of this construction is an understanding of CBT as a highly permeable system whose configurability supports the reticulation of multiple forms of power. In this discussion some other attempts to introduce Foucault’s ideas into VET research are considered in relation to the main case.Steven Hodge is a PhD candidate in the Centre for Research in Education, Equity and Work at the University of South Australia, where he is researching learning in vocational education. He was a secondary art teacher and also studied philosophy. Steven has worked in the vocational education sector over the last decade, becoming interested in epistemological problems in Australia’s vocational education system along the way.  TONY FLETCHER The War Against Aboriginal Australia: Foucault, Racism and Social Work EducationIn a series of lectures at the College de France 1975-1976 entitled ‘Society Must Be Defended’ Michel Foucault delivers the (dis) position; ‘… sovereignty’s old right—to take life or let live… came to be complemented by … the power to ‘make’ live and ‘let’ die…’(2004:241). Foucault connects this (dis) position with socio-political events to produce his concept that modern societies - though describing their machinations as in a state of peace - are internally at war with those subjects/bodies produced as members of an ‘inferior species’ (Foucault, 2004). This paper discusses the application of a Foucauldian (dis)position regarding this concept of ‘racism’ when connected to the concepts of ‘fields of visibility’, ‘spatial distribution’ and ‘biopower’ with social work students, to explore respectful practice when working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.Tony Fletcher is a PhD candidate in the School of Psychology, Social Work and Social Policy at the University of South Australia. His research interests include gendered violence, masculinities, whiteness and finding ways to make connections with poststructural scholarship that support the foregrounding of potential and the loosening of grids of possibility in social work practice.  CHRIS HORSELL Foucault, Social Policy and HomelessnessFoucault’s work provides fertile ground for an analysis of areas of significant concern to students of social policy through his development of the ideas of discourse, power/knowledge, surveillance and the metaphor of the panopticon and the way populations are constructed as included and excluded. His development of these concepts allows an insight into the development and function of policy not always apparent in traditional social policy analysis. In this paper, the author explores why these concepts are pertinent to understanding how homeless populations are constructed as objects of social policy, particularly with respect to contemporary discourses of inclusion and exclusion. The author argues that the use of these ideas challenges some of the less obvious assumptions permeating current developments in policy and service provision to homeless people, while also enabling an ability to respond more contextually to shifting frameworks of power.Chris Horsell is currently a PhD candidate at Flinders University’s School of Social Work. His area of study is homelessness and social exclusion in Australia, with a particular emphasis on a critical analysis of the South Australian Social Inclusion Initiative. Chris is currently employed as a Senior Project Officer with the Department of Families and Communities (SA).  PAL AHLUWALIA KEYNOTE: The Poststructural and the Post-colonialPost-colonial theory is many different things to many different people. It serves many different purposes. It is drawn from the unique conditions which its adherents inhabit and from the unique experiences upon which they draw. For many of us, and for post- colonial theory at its broadest, a reading of Edward Said is a central experience, and it is that reading which puts Foucault at the heart of post-colonial thinking, or which contributes to the embedding of the poststructural in the post-colonial. But there is an alternative reading, and closer analysis demonstrates how the relationship between the poststructural and the post-colonial can be read as the inverse of one which embeds poststructuralism at the beginning. Looking at the suite of experiences which were formative in the development of Foucault and other central poststructuralists, it can be argued that the post-colonial is embedded at the root of poststructural thinking.Prior to commencing as Pro Vice Chancellor, Professor Ahluwalia was Research SA Chair and Professor of Post-colonial Studies in the Hawke Research Institute and Director of the Centre for Post-colonial Studies. At the same time he was a Professor in the Department of Ethnic Studies at the University of California. His main research interests lie in the areas of African studies, social and cultural theory, in particular, postcolonial theory and the processes of diaspora, exile, and migration. On 14 October 2008, Professor Ahluwalia was appointed a UNESCO Chair in Transnational Diasporas and Reconciliation Studies.

CfP Disciplining Dissent , 18-19 September 2009‏

Interdisciplinary Workshop on 'Disciplining Dissent'University of Bristol, 18-19 September 2009Call for Papers Recent years have seen an upsurge of scholarly interest in the activities and significance of the activist groups and resistance movements which have come to be associated with 'anti-globalisation' politics. Whilst analyses of the diverse assemblages, solidarity movements and activist networks involved in resisting neoliberal globalisation and promoting alternatives are an important addition to literatures on globalisation and global politics, there has been a tendency in some of this work to romanticise the activities and transformative capacities of these groups and networks. What is often missing from the analysis is consideration of the formal and informal forms of discipline that operate towards, within and through resistance movements - be it through coercive repression, through interventions to co-opt social movements, or through the production of particular resisting subjects. We are organising an interdisciplinary workshop at the University of Bristol on 18-19 September 2009 that will explore the different forms of discipline and power that operate towards, within and through contemporary resistance movements. The workshop builds on a panel session at the British International Studies Association Annual Conference in Exeter in December 2008 and a collaborative workshop held at the International Studies Association Annual Convention in New York in February 2009 that explored these themes. It will bring together scholars from diverse disciplinary backgrounds who share an interest in the ways in which contemporary forms of political dissent, such as those represented by 'anti'- or 'alter-globalisation movement(s)', are both disciplined and disciplining. We are currently seeking proposals for papers that address any aspect of the formal and informal ways in which contemporary forms of political dissent are disciplined and disciplining, including but not limited to forms of discipline based around class, gender, sexuality, race, law/exception, militarism and capital. We welcome predominantly empirical as well as predominantly theoretical papers. Selected papers from the workshop will be published in a special issue of the journal Globalizations, which will be dedicated to the theme of Disciplining Dissent. Titles and abstracts of proposed papers (max 200 words) should be sent to Lara Coleman (lara.coleman@bristol.ac.uk) and Karen Tucker (karen.tucker@bristol.ac.uk) by Friday 29 May 2009. Registration details and a call for workshop participants will be sent out nearer the time. The workshop fee will be £30 (with a discounted rate of £20 for research students/low incomes) and will include lunch and refreshments on both days. We will have some funds available towards overseas and domestic travel costs for selected paper-giving participants. Lara ColemanKaren TuckerDepartment of Politics, University of Bristol ----------------------Karen TuckerPhD CandidateDepartment of PoliticsUniversity of Bristol10 Priory RdBristolBS8 1TUUnited Kingdom Karen.Tucker@bristol.ac.uk

Postcolonial Ethnicity, Visuality and Cultural Politics‏

Free Day Conference. All Welcome.

‘Postcolonial Ethnicity, Visuality and Cultural Politics’.

Cardiff University, Friday 29th May 2009.

Blog:
http://cultstud.blogspot.com/

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=61785428357

Call for Papers (Sorry, no vacancies for this one, but please call again!):
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/newsandevents/events/09postcolonialethnicitycallforpapers.html

Cardiff University:
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/research/researchgroups/racerepresentationandculturalidentity/index.html

CfP : 'Security Insecurity and Migration in Europe', Sept 18/19 Leicester‏

*CALL FOR PAPERS* CONFERENCE ON SECURITY INSECURITY AND MIGRATION IN EUROPE Organised by IMEPO (Hellenic Migration Policy Institute) and the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Leicester. Venue: University of Leicester, 18-19 September 2009 The end of the Cold War division of Europe and the recent enlargement of the European Union (EU) have generated new, complex forms of population movement and have reconfigured refugee and asylum issues. The forces that determine these movements are powerful (for example, growing disparities in the level of prosperity and human security experienced by different societies), and in the current economic climate, the ability to modify them is limited. The national states and supra-national institutions of Europe have been presented with massive challenges as they have sought to grapple with the evolution of new forms of mobility and migration within and into the EU and its western satellites. These unfolded against the continuing redefinition of relations with the non-European world. These complex and shifting forms of population movement both questioned established notions of identity and citizenship and created challenges for different scales of governance in both sending and receiving states in the light of emerging divergences between the interests of migrants and states trying to control their entry as well as between governments, NGOs and civil society.After the events of the 9/11 security concerns are high on national and international agendas, including in the context of the movement of people. Migration issues, having often been framed in terms of security concerns, they have simultaneously given rise to issues of insecurity: on the one hand, security of borders, political, societal and economic security/insecurity in the host country; while on the other hand, concerns about human security, that is social, legal, economic and other conditions of (in)security for EU citizens and for migrants who enter or have entered Europe. In terms of state security, migration is a core target of increasingly globally networked surveillance capabilities. In terms of human security, it exposes the gap between the protections that migrants formally enjoy under international law and the realities they experience as they travel and work across different countries and hence a human rights deficit.Hence, irregular migration poses difficult challenges for states as well as exposing migrants to insecurity and vulnerability. This conference will discuss both the concerns of states in this respect and the need to protect the fundamental rights of migrants. Against this background, the conference aims to explore a number of related themes: o The dilemmas involved in framing policy-making on migration in Europe.o The implications of the securitisation of migration and migrants.o The extent to which irregular migration constitutes a real or perceived threat to state security and human security.o Migration, economic in/securities and the informalisation of European labour markets.o Migration, societal in/securities and rise of racism and xenophobia in Europe.o The living conditions and security needs of migrants in European countries.o Processes of inclusion/exclusion.o Gender and Migration.o Role of social capital in negotiating spaces of control.o Human trafficking as a threat to security; who is insecure?o Politics of diversity and multiculturalism.o Migrants as objects of globally networked surveillance.o The implications of state structures and institutional capabilities for the migration-security balance sheet. Organisation: Registration fee: £130 (this includes conference package including papers presented at the conference, coffee breaks and lunches, reception and conference dinner on Friday evening). Student subsidized fee: £95. Further information can be obtained from Mrs. Jane Russell. Email jer13@leicester.ac.uk Proposals for papers with one page abstract should be sent by 30 May 2009 to Dr. Lazaridis. Email gl36@leicester.ac.uk

Conference registration open: "Militarism: Political Economy, Security, Theory"‏

Registration is now open for the conference on "Militarism: Political Economy, Security, Theory," being held at the University of Sussex on 14-15 May 2009. Provisional programme and registration details available at:<http://www.militarismconference.blogspot.com/> Registration is free. However, please register by April 15th to guarantee a space! Dr. Anna StavrianakisLecturer in International RelationsUniversity of SussexFalmerBrighton BN1 9SJ A.Stavrianakis@sussex.ac.uk http://eprints.sussex.ac.uk/view/people/Stavrianakis,_Anna.html

CfP WORKSHOP: Reframing the Nation: Media Publics and Strategic Narratives‏

CALL FOR PAPERS INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP: Reframing the Nation: Media Publics and Strategic NarrativesDATE: 18-19 May 2009VENUE: The Open University, Hawley Crescent, Camden Town, London. Keynote speakers:Sir Lawrence Freedman (King's College, London)Nick Cull (Annenberg School, University of Southern California)Laura Roselle (Elon University)Philip Seib (Annenberg School, University of Southern California) Nation states have always used the media to project strategic national narratives on the world stage. But recent shifts in geopolitical and diplomatic imperatives, especially the 'war on terror', and the changing digital media ecology, have generated new kinds of public diplomacy initiatives. For example, the BBC World Service, funded by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, has recently cut radio services in Eastern Europe to make way for BBC Arabic and Persian TV channels, with accompanying tri-platform online services (text, audio and video). These initiatives place high value on interactive debate, citizen journalism, and user generated content. But does such interactivity really contribute to the BBC's declared aim of fostering a 'global conversation', i.e. democratic debate in the Muslim world in particular? And is a coherent strategic narrative about British interests abroad projected by these channels? Several English-language transnational television channels recently launched, including Al Jazeera English, Press TV (Iran), CCTV9 (China), France 24, and Russia Today. They pose further questions about strategic narratives and public diplomacy in the new media ecology. Diasporic groups, increasingly connected via digital media, are being recognised as exploitable for diplomacy purposes. States can mobilise citizens both at home and abroad in diplomatic media initiatives via internet chat rooms and news discussion sites. How are we to research and evaluate changing configurations of media 'audiences' or 'publics', and the uses of digital diasporas by states for diplomacy purposes? And what about the ways in which diaspora actors use digital media to challenge strategic national narratives? The media are essentially storytelling machines. When political narratives represent future-oriented identity claims, they typically invoke the past in order to articulate distinctive national positions on events, issues, policy domains, or a country's place in world political narratives. As social lives and political events become more open to being digitally recorded, narrated, stored and transported in unpredictable ways, the potential for citizens to disrupt such strategic narratives and public diplomacy efforts also grows. Can citizen journalism and digital storytelling constitute an effective form of resistance to strategic national narratives? At a moment when emerging state powers such as China, India, and the EU pose a challenge to US pre-eminence globally, there is a need for comparative studies of how citizens as well as state, political, and military actors are using media to reframe and/or contest national narratives. This exploratory workshop addresses these dynamics through discussion of studies of how the 'strategic narratives' of nation-states and also of transnational actors, like the EU, are projected and interpreted domestically and internationally. It brings together scholars from Sociology, Media Studies, Political Communications and International Relations to address these key questions: * How can we identify, analyse and assess the impact of strategic narratives?* How are configurations of audiences and publics changing as a result of migration and media technologies, and how do such changes affect the meanings and practices of (mediated) citizenship?* How do strategic narratives translate (or not) across linguistic or cultural boundaries within and/or between nations?* How do state actors work with the media, the military, NGOs, corporations, and other institutions to project strategic narratives?* How do political leaders assimilate international events into established national narratives and/or change the narratives?* How do media users respond to attempts to shift strategic national narratives?* What difference do strategic narratives make to international alliances, military interventions, and the domestic legitimacy of leaders?* What forms of knowledge and understandings of history are drawn upon in mobilising and/or challenging strategic narratives?* What methodological tools (from the Arts and Humanities and the Social Sciences) can help us research and interpret the political, social and cultural significance of strategic national narratives? Please send an abstract (150 words max) by 20th April to Karen Ho: k.d.ho@open.ac.uk. For further information contact either Marie Gillespie (m.gillespie@open.ac.uk) or Ben O'Loughlin (Ben.OLoughlin@rhul.ac.uk) or call Ben on 01784 443153. The exploratory workshop is funded by the Open University's ESRC Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change (CRESC) and the New Political Communication Unit and the Centre for European Politics at Royal Holloway College. It is also supported by the Centre for Global Political Economy at the University of Sussex.-- ________________________________________Dr Andreas AntoniadesDirector, Centre for Global Political Economy (CGPE)Lecturer, Department of International RelationsUniversity of SussexBrighton BN1 9SN, UKTel: +44 (0)1273 872735Email: A.A.Antoniades@sussex.ac.uk Webpage: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/ir/profile215111.html_CGPE Website: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/cgpe

CfP: Panel on Foreign Policy Analysis, BISA Annual Conference‏

Call for PapersBISA Annual Conference, University of Leicester14-16 December 2009 Panel on Foreign Policy Analysis For this year’s BISA Annual Conference in Leicester, we are planning tosubmit a panel on ‘Foreign Policy Analysis: The Promise and Pitfalls ofTheoretical Integration’ (for a synopsis, see below). On the occasion ofthis panel, we would like to invite paper proposals. Abstracts shouldcontain a maximum of 200 words and should be sent to us by 27 April 2009 atthe latest. Please submit your proposals to: Kai.Oppermann@uni-koeln.de andKlaus.Brummer@polwiss.phil.uni-erlangen.de. We are looking forward to your proposals, and we hope that we can puttogether an interesting panel for the conference. ----------------------Foreign Policy Analysis: The Promise and Pitfalls of Theoretical Integration The field of Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) is multifaceted. Its approachescan be differentiated along several dimensions, such as levels of analysis(e.g. individual decision-makers, decision-making in groups, bureaucracy),whether they are structural or agent-orientated, or whether they areconstructivist, rationalist or cognitive/psychological. Against thisbackground, Carlsnaes (2002) referred to the ‘eclecticism’ of FPA, andrightly so. At the same time, the diversity of approaches could be one ofFPA’s major strengths, particularly if one manages to integrate insightsfrom several approaches into one model. In this sense, Hudson (2007) arguesthat theoretical integration is FPA’s ‘true promise’. Indeed, most of therecent theoretical innovation in FPA has emerged from efforts that took upthe challenge of integrating insights from different approaches. One exampleis Poliheuristic Theory (e.g. Mintz 2003), whose two-stage model ofdecision-making comprises a cognitive and a rational dimension. Overall, thepromise of theoretical integration is to receive a more nuanced and accuratepicture of foreign policy decision-making. On the other hand, the mostserious pitfall seems to be that integrated approaches turn into grab bagswhich include everything but explain nothing. This aim of this panel is to examine the promise and pitfalls of theoreticalintegration in Foreign Policy Analysis. We invite papers that (a) addressthe possibility (and desirability) of generating integrated approaches inFPA in general, (b) discuss existing integrated approaches, or (c) proposenew integrated approaches. Best regards,Klaus Brummer, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, GermanyKai Oppermann, University of Cologne, Germany Dr. Kai Oppermann- Assistant Professor -Chair for International Politics and Foreign PolicyUniversity of CologneTel.: 0221-470-2854; Fax: 0221-470-6732http://www.jaeger.uni-koeln.de/oppermann.html

The Biopolitics of Resilience Workshop -Keele June 18-19 2009‏

ESRC-Biopolitics of Security Research Network Seminar Series on‘Contemporary Biopolitical Security’Second Workshop: THE BIOPOLITICS OF RESILIENCE Keele University, 18-19 June 2009Keynote Address: Prof Pat O’Malley, University of Sydney ‘Giving fear a respectable name’: Military resilience, liberalism andscientific governance Programme: Thursday 18 June 13.00 – Registration and coffee 13.30 – Introduction: -Luis Lobo-Guerrero and Peter Adey (University of Keele) ‘The Biopolitics of Resilience’ 14.00 –16:00 Panel 1: Ecologies Melinda Cooper (University of Sydney) and Jeremy Walker (University ofTechnology Sydney) ‘Genealogies of Resilience: from Systems Ecology to the Political Economy ofCrisis Adaptation’ Mike Hodson and Simon Marvin (University of Salford) ‘Urban Ecological Security’ A new urban paradigm? Doerthe Rosenau (King’s College London) ‘‘Leave it Alone!’ - Genetic Engineering and the (Counter-)Discourse ofResilience’ 16.00 – tea and coffee 16.30- 18.00 Keynote address: Prof. Pat O’Malley (University of Sydney) ‘Giving fear a respectable name’: Military resilience, liberalism andscientific governance 19.00 – Drinks reception: Claus Moser Research Centre, lobby 19.30 – Workshop Dinner: Keele Hall Friday 19 June 9.00-11:00 Panel 2: Scales Will Medd (Lancaster University) ‘Flood, drought and the neoliberal resilience’ Jon Coaffe and Marian Hawkesworth (Manchester University), and DavidMurakami Wood (Newcastle University) ‘We are all risk managers now! The everyday impact of urban resilienceagainst terrorism’ Nadine Voelkner (Sussex University/Keele University) ‘‘It’s about prevention’: human trafficking risk and resilience in Vietnam’ 11.00-11.15 coffee 11.30-13.30 Panel 3: Science and Systems Judith Verweijen (University of Utrecht / Netherlands Defence Academy) ‘Resilient communities: a new target of stabilization operations’ Christopher Zebrowski (Keele University) ‘The Resilience Apparatus: An interdisciplinary examination of resiliencestrategies’ Peter Adey (Keele University), Steve Graham (Durham University), BenAnderson (Durham University) ‘Preparing for the end of the world as we know it’ 13.30-14.30 Lunch 14.30-15.30 Roundtable and conclusion For more information in relation to the workshop rationale and abstracts ofpresentations, please visit:http://www.keele.ac.uk/research/lpj/research/BiopoliticsResearchUnit/index.html Please register your attendance with Rosie Shepherd(r.e.shepherd@ilpj.keele.ac.uk) -- Dr Luis Lobo-GuerreroLecturer in International RelationsSchool of Politics, International Relations and PhilosophyChancellor's BuildingKeele UniversityKeele, ST5 5BGUnited Kingdom Deputy-Postgraduate Research DirectorResearch Institute for Law, Politics and JusticeClaus Moser BuildingKeele University BPS-RU@ Keele Biopolitics of Security Research Unit @ Keelehttp://www.keele.ac.uk/research/lpj/research/BiopoliticsResearchUnit/index.html

Seminar on Rhetoric and Politics in Contemporary Democracy‏

Persuasion: Rhetoric and Politics in Contemporary Democracy
A seminar organized by the Goldsmiths' Centre for the Study of Global Media and Democracy and the Centre for the Study of Culture and Politics, University of Swansea.
May 5 2009, Goldsmiths, University of London, 2-5pm
Venue: Small Hall Theatre, Richard Hoggart Building, followed by a wine reception in the SCR
Speakers:
Aletta Norval (University of Essex)
Michael Carrithers (Durham University)
Rochana Bajpai (SOAS)
Alan Finlayson (Swansea University)
Chair: James Martin (Goldsmiths)
Persuasion is one of the most fundamental of democratic political activities. But it is also one of the most ambiguous. Does democratic development and expansion require the slow substitution of persuasion or rational conviction or, on the contrary, the proliferation of opportunities for rhetorical contestation? Where is the line between persuasion and force? Are there standards of truth or consent that guarantee the democratic character of a persuasive activity? What forms of rhetoric distinguish a democratic polity from tyranny? What happens to political persuasion in an economy and culture dominated by commercial persuasion? How can we best understand and analyse the forms, modes and locations of contemporary political rhetoric as manifested in visual and media cultures?
This interdisciplinary seminar explores the modes of democratic persuasion, the methods for its explication and interpretation and the prospects for rhetoric both in the academy and in the contemporary multifaceted polis.
The event is free and open to all, but please contact James Martin (j.martin@gold.ac.uk) if you'd like to attend.

CFP: Reassessing Critiques of Liberal Peace - BISA 09‏

Call for Papers: ‘Reassessing Critiques of the Liberal Peace’ From Meera Sabaratnam (LSE) and David Chandler (Westminster) Panel proposal for annual BISA conference, University of Leicester, 14-16December 2009. The ‘liberal peace’ is regularly bandied around as a critical indictment ofinternational intervention and frameworks of statebuilding: subject tocritiques from advocates of extended intervention (such as Roland Paris) andthose critical of intervention (such as Roger MacGinty, Oliver Richmond andMichael Pugh). Apparently intervention is structured around the needs of power, capital,and ideology, and articulated through demands for democratisation andopening up to market relations and legitimised through classical liberalassumptions about progress and individual autonomy. We are seeking toorganise one or perhaps two panels at BISA in order to discuss the validityof the liberal peace critique both empirically and theoretically. Empirically, we seek papers which might problematise the assumptions of theliberal peace in practice: does this critique fit the practices and concernsof interveners and 'subjects' on the ground? Theoretically, we seek papers which might engage with the assumption thatthis ‘liberal’ framing of policy and practice is indeed what is at stake,and the direction in which critical research in this area should bedeveloped. Abstracts and full participant details should be sent to the panel convenersMeera Sabaratnam (LSE) M.Sabaratnam@lse.ac.uk and David Chandler(Westminster) D.Chandler@wmin.ac.uk by Friday 24 April at the latest.

What is the outlook for reaching ambitious climate agreement in Copenhagen?'Chatham House‏

The Politics of Climate Change AgreementMonday 6 - Tuesday 7 July 2009Chatham House, London A major two-day international conference How ambitious will climate agreement be in Copenhagen in December?Register at this high-level event to find out first hand what the prospects are for reaching ambitious climate agreement in Copenhagen in December 2009. New speakers at this conference include: Kevin Conrad, Prime Minister's Special Envoy & Ambassador for Environment and Climate Change, Department of the Prime Minister and National Executive Council, Papua New Guinea; Elliot Diringer,Vice President, International Strategies, Pew Center on Global Climate Change; Ambassador Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad, Permanent Representative of the Republic of the Sudan to the United Nations and Chairman of the Group of 77.They and other representatives from key countries, experts and commentators will discuss: * The science: which elements of the deal are essential to avoid dangerous climate change? * The UN discussions: what is the state of play, politically?* How will 'common but differentiated responsibilities' be interpreted?* How 'green' are governments' stimulus packages?* If agreement is not reached, what will business do?Visit our website for the full agenda. Register now to benefit from the early bird rateJoin these and other high-level experts to gain an understanding of the outlook for reaching agreement, and what the alternatives might be. Register now to benefit from the early booking rate and ensure your place at this essential forum. SponsorsMedia partner Registration & information Book by 6 May to benefit from the early booking rate.www.chathamhouse.org.ukconferences@chathamhouse.org.uk+44 (0)20 7957 5754 Keynote speakers Yvo de BoerExecutive Secretary United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Kevin ConradPrime Minister's Special Envoy & Ambassador for Environment and Climate ChangeDepartment of the Prime Minister and National Executive Council, Papua New Guinea Marthinus Van SchalkwykMinister of Environmental Affairs and TourismSouth Africa Speaker highlights Elliot DiringerVice President, International StrategiesPew Center on Global Climate Change Ambassador Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad Permanent Representative of the Republic of the Sudan to the United Nations andChairman of the Group of 77

CfP Graduate Workshop on Classical IR and Political Theory‏

CALL FOR PAPERS GRADUATE WORKSHOP ON CLASSICAL IR AND POLITICAL THEORY organised by CRIPT (a BISA working group) in association with theDepartment of International Politics, AberystwythUniversity Friday, May 29th, 2009Main Hall, Department of International Politics, Aberystwyth University Since Martin Wight's landmark article 'Why is there no InternationalTheory?' IR theorists seem to have developed two main responses to Wight's argument. They have either considered thelack of a distinctively international body of thought as a rather alarming state of affairs to be amended under thepressures of globalisation and the gradual convergence of the politicalwith the international, or they have returned to the rather neglectedclassical tradition of political thought in order to employ this literature as ameans of achieving a better understanding of the contemporary world. It should not come as a surprise then thatthe use of the classics of political thought by contemporary IRtheorists usually reveals more a bout the latter than the former.Lately, some revisionist literature advocating a more contextualist approach has attempted tooffer an alternative, less presentistinterpretation of the classical tradition of political theory and itssignificance for the study of international politics. Classical authorssuch as Vitoria, Grotius, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Rousseau, Kant and Millare being revisited and their legacy in international relationsreappreciated under a new light and away from the distortions imposed by the study of IR as a social science. At the same time, new interpretations of 'classical' IR thinkers aregradually seeing the light of day. The work of classical realists like Carr, Niebuhr, Morgenthau and Herz is beingreappraised in order to reveal the critical and normative elements intheir thought. Similarly, the contribution of interwar idealists isbeing re-evaluated beyond simplifications and disciplinary distortions.Some scholars even talk about a positivist 'detour' of the disciplinethat has contributed to the silencing of any complexity and ambiguity inthe work of canonical IR thinkers and the discrediting of the criticalelements of classical realist thought. With the emergence of a criticaland post-structuralist preoccupation in the field, the suppressedaspects of classical realism have come to the fore revealing hiddenprospects and fruitful opportunities for a critical re-engagement withcanonical IR thinkers. This workshop seeks to investigate the nature and significance of thisre-engagement with classical thinkers both in political theory and IR and to assess the ways in which it has beenconducted. We invite paper proposals from graduate students and youngacademics working in the fields of international politics, social andpolitical theory and the history of ideas. Possible topics may include: 1) Why do classical thinkers remain integral to the study ofInternational Relations (as a discipline and a subject matter) andinternational political theory in a globalised world?2) To what extent does the critique of traditional accounts oftimeless concepts in international political theory reflect similardebates already conducted in the domain of political theory?3) Is it possible to theorise international politics beyond the'perennialist' vs. 'contextualist' divide in order to create a newsynthesis that would move the field forward?4) In what way might such synthesis retrieve key concepts of ourpolitical culture (such as democracy, liberty, human rights) and addressthe complex issues of our time without succumbing to presentism orideological misuse?5) What could be the basis of a fruitful re-engagement with thecanonical thinkers of classical realism and idealism?6) What are the lessons we can draw for IR as a discipline andfor international politics as a subject matter from the work of'classical' IR thinkers such as Woolf, Niebuhr, Morgenthau and Mitrany(to name only a few)?7) Is there room to re-think possible connections and conceptualoverlap between classical realist thinking and critical international theory?8) Teaching the classical tradition of IR and internationalpolitical theory: how to engage and challenge students? Deadline for abstracts: FRIDAY, MAY 8 2009 Please send paper title, abstract (of no more than 300 words), and yourinstitutional affiliation to cript@lse.ac.uk. Registration fee: A33 (students)/ A35 (staff). Some limited fundswill be available to cover paper givers expenses. For any furtherinformation, please contact CRIPT conveners Anthony Cooper (RoyalHolloway), Susanna Karlsson(Aberystwyth), Vassilis Paipais (LSE) and Andreja Zevnik (Aberystwyth),at cript@lse.ac.uk.