Ideology and International Order: Strategies of Contestation and Change

Session Submission Type: Full Paper Panel

Session Description

Explaining changes in international order is one of the most important and enduring topics of international relations (Waltz 1979; Wendt 1999). This panel is aimed at addressing questions about changes in order through the lens of ideology (Ikenberry 2011; Voeten 2021). A large volume of the existing scholarship focuses on the vitality of the liberal international order (Ikenberry 2017; 2018; Lake, Martin, and Risse 2021). Inspired by this literature, this panel will aspire to tackle several questions. First, since modern changes are likely to occur outside of hegemonic war, many of the papers focus on the diverse mechanisms and tools of ideological transformation. What are the strategies of ideological contestation? Second, what are the dominant ideological competitors to liberalism, and how attractive are these alternatives?

Some papers on this panel take up these questions by focusing on the mechanisms of influence, inspired by previous research that predicts that ideological changes occur during power transitions. According to Cox (1987), laying down universal norms, institutions, and mechanisms that operate across national boundaries can help a rising power align international standards with domestic preferences. Indeed, as Gilpin notes “Rome and Britain each created a world order, the oppressive rule of the Pax Romana was in most respects very different from the generally liberal rule of Pax Britannica” (Gilpin 1981). In the face of rising material power, however, great powers can generate threats (Walt 1987) that hold up the ability to enact change. Hulvey’s paper builds from research examining how China is socialized to the existing international order (Johnston 2008) to explain how China uses the same tools to overcome threat perception and mobilize coalitions to support changes in the status quo. Baturo examines which states align with Russia when Russia attempts to change the meaning of widely accepted liberal principles and universal norms at the United Nations.

Other papers will identify and analyze the reach of ideological competitors to liberalism. In light of the ideological competition to “win hearts and minds”, questions still remain to be answered. For example, when do international ideologies gain global acceptance (see, e.g., Ikenberry and Kupchan 1990)? How attractive are alternative ideologies relative to liberalism to elites that operate in international organizations and have the authority to set new rules of the game? Brand’s paper looks at this question through a distinct mechanism of change and identifies how ideological competitors use liberalism as a process to undermine its ideological foundations. Others explore when ideological or particularistic preferences prevail. Voeten’s work explores the logic of alliances and contributes new concepts and measurements to our understanding of alignments.

Sub Unit

• Division 43: International History and Politics

Individual Presentations

• Multilateral Illiberalism in the International Order - Megan Brand, Princeton University

• Polarizing or Uniting the Nations? Theorizing Attraction to China's Order - Rachel A Hulvey, University of Pennsylvania

• Ideological and Particularistic State Preferences: Concepts and Measurement - Erik Voeten, Georgetown University

Chair

• Erik Voeten Georgetown University

Discussants

• Stephen M. Walt Harvard University

• Christopher Darnton Naval Postgraduate School