Has History Restarted?

It is fashionable to claim “the end of history”. As the times of classical wars seem to be over, many scholars – particularly Alexandre Kojève – argue that we currently face “the end of international relations”. This article argues the opposite, that is to say that we are now confronted with the real beginning of international relations, and even of “intersocial relations”, in which social actors and individuals are more and more involved. Such an analysis is also a way of reinterpreting the dawn of IR as a discipline, its debates and tensions, its present transformations. The article questions the traditional typology of IR theories, and points out correlations between theoretical challenges and changes or evolutions of history. It is also a way of shedding light on what could be considered, in such a chaos, the French approach to International Relations. Is it only the French touch or the basis of a new paradigm? The article criticises the previous domination of American realism, which was built on an essentially conflictual vision of international interactions. While, throughout history several alternative approaches attempted to challenge Realism, they appeared too weak to do so in a meaningful way. The global transformations since the end of the “Cold War” open opportunities for a substantial reconstruction of IR studies, in order to incorporate the growing contribution of intersocial interactions and non-state actors in World politics.

1. Angell N. (1913). The Great Illusion : a study of the military power to national advantage. N.Y.: Knickerbocker Press. 416 p.

2. Aron R. (1966). Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations. N.Y.: Doubleday. 820 p.

3. Badie B. (2013). Transnationalizing Diplomacy and Global Governance In Diplomacy in a Globalizing World Ed. by P. Kerr, G. Wiseman. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 85-102.

4. Beardsworth R. (2011). Cosmopolitanism and International Relations Theory. Cambridge: Polity Press. 224 p.

5. Bobbitt Ph. (2002). The Shield of Achilles: War, Peace and the Course of History. N.Y.: Knopf. 919 p.

6. Bourgeois L. (1910). Pour la Soci t des Nations. Paris: Fasquelle. 496 p.

7. Brecher J., Costillo T., Smith B. (eds) (2000). Globalization from Below: the Power of Solidarity. Cambridge: South End Press. 164 p.

8. Bull H. (1977). The Anarchical Society. A Study of Order in World Politics. L.: Macmillan. 335 p.

9. Cerny Ph. (1997). Paradoxes of the Competition State: The Dynamics of Political Globalization. Government and Opposition. Vol. 32, No. 2. P. 251-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.1997. tb00161.x

10. Durkheim E. (1984). The Division of Labour in Society. N.Y.: Free Press. 352 p.

11. Geertz Cl. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. N.Y.: Free Press. 470 p.

12. Gilpin R. (1981). War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 272 p.

13. Grotius H. (1999). Du droit de la guerre et de la paix. Paris: PUF. 888 p.

14. Kaldor M. (1999). New and Old Wars : organized violence in a global era. Cambridge: Polity Press. 192 p.

15. Kindleberger Ch. (1973). The World in Depression, 1929-1939. Berkley: University of California Press. 336 p.

16. Kojve A. (1981). Esquisse d’une ph nom nologie du droit. Paris: Gallimard. 592 p.

17. Kojve A. (1947). Introduction la lecture de Hegel. Paris: Gallimard. 600 p.

18. Krasner St. (1999). Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 264 p.

19. Mill St. (1973). A Few Words on Nonintervention. In Essays on Politics and Culture. Ed. by G. Himmelfarb. Gloster: Peter Smith.

20. Morgenthau H. (1954). Politics Among Nations. N.Y.: Knopf. 600 p.

21. Muller H. (2007). Are Distinct IR Reflected in Diverging Security Policies? Groningen: Multig.

22. Niebuhr R. (1932). Moral Man and Immoral Society. N.Y.: Scribner’s. 284 p.

23. Rosenau J. (1990). Turbulence in World Politics: a theory of change and continuity. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 480 p.

24. Scalapino R. (1991). The United States and Asia: Future Prospects. Foreign Affairs. Vol. 70, No. 5. P. 19-40.

25. Scelle G. (1932). Pr cis de droit des gens. Paris: Sirey. 332 p.

26. Schmitt C. (1996). The Concept of the Political. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 111 p.

27. Scholte J.A. (2000). Globalization. A Critical Introduction. N.Y.: Palgrave. 361 p.

28. Sharp P. (2009). Diplomatic Theory of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 339 p.

29. Tarrow S. (2005). The New Transnational Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 258 p.

30. Teivanen T. (2002). Enter Economism, Exit politics: Experts, Economic Policy and the Damage to Democracy. London: Zed Press. 227 p.

31. Waltz K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. N.Y.: Addison-Wesley. 251 p.

32. Wight M. (1991). International Theory: The Three Traditions. Leicester: Leicester University Press. 286 p. Wight M. (1977). Systems of States. Leicester: Leicester University Press. 232 p.