992223 The Future of the International Order

Warning: The information on this page is indicative. The subject outline for a particular session, location and mode of offering is the authoritative source of all information about the subject for that offering. Required texts, recommended texts and references in particular are likely to change. Students will be provided with a subject outline once they enrol in the subject.

Subject handbook information prior to 2025 is available in the Archives.

Description

Understanding the factors that shape the international order is crucial for anticipating global trends, challenges, and opportunities. It enables informed decision-making, strategic planning, and effective engagement with global issues, making it essential for policymakers. In this subject, students explore the complexities of the international order, including its theoretical frameworks, actors, institutions, and potential future directions. Students analyse the various theoretical frameworks that have been used to understand the international order, including Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism, and examine the various actors and institutions involved in shaping the international system, including states, international organisations, non-state actors, NGOs and transnational networks. The historical development of the international order is also analysed by considering the legacy of major events such as the Cold War, and the role of ideology, power and norms in shaping the current international order. Through a combination of theoretical analysis, case studies and policy analysis, students develop a comprehensive understanding of the international order and its implications for international relations.

Subject learning objectives (SLOs)

Course intended learning outcomes (CILOs)

This subject engages with the following Course Intended Learning Outcomes (CILOs), which are tailored to the Graduate Attributes set for all graduates of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (INT = International Studies CILOs):

• Apply advanced understanding of international relations theories and concepts to the analysis of real-world case studies and complex global issues. (2.1)
• Apply advanced research methods and data analysis techniques to address complex global issues. (2.2)
• Effectively communicate evidence-based solutions to complex global issues using advanced research methods and data analysis techniques. (6.1)

Teaching and learning strategies

You are guided through a series of six online modules framed around active learning. Each module draws on a wide range of contemporary and historical empirical and theoretical content. You are expected to engage interactively through online discussion boards and activities, and you will be scaffolded towards conducting your own analysis on current and historical challenges in the international order.

This subject uses an authentic learning approach where you will develop both a presentation and a policy brief to communicate your analysis to key audiences. You will have opportunities to practice and refine the application of core theories within International Relations to key contemporary challenges. Synchronous online seminars provide an opportunity to revise key concepts, further develop connections with other students, and to prepare for assessments. You will receive formative feedback on assignment tasks both from lecturers and peers, including early formative feedback, via discussion boards, Canvas activities, and in Live and Online zoom sessions.

Content (topics)

In this subject, learning is scaffolded around the application of core theories in International Relations across a wide range of actors and a range of contemporary case studies. Each module introduces core theories of International Relations along with historical or current empirical examples. The subject starts from the foundations of the modern international order after World War Two, progresses through the Cold War, and into current and future challenges around climate change, populism and the internationalized far-right, and shifting power relations with the rise of the BRICS countries. The subject also engages with debates specific to the liberal international order and the challenges to this order.

Assessment

Assessment task 1: Reflection and presentation

Assessment task 2: Policy Brief

Minimum requirements

There is no minimum requirement for this subject.

Required texts

There are no required texts for this subject. Recommended readings will be available via UTS Library and the subject site.

References

Adler-Nissen, R. (2024). The Normalization of contestation: The sociology of knowledge and the challenges to the liberal international order. Global Studies Quarterly 4(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/isagsq/ksae020

Barnett, M. N., & Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics. Cornell University Press.

Bellamy, A. J. (2015). The Responsibility to protect: A defence. Oxford University Press.

Bosco, D. L. (2014). Assessing the UN Security Council: A concert perspective, Global Governance, 20(4), 545-561.

Buzan, B. (2024). A new Cold War?: The case for a general concept, International Politics 61(2), 239-257. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-024-00559-8

Carnegie, A., et al. (2024). Private participation: How populists engage with international organizations, The Journal of Politics 86(3), 877-891.

Duncombe, C., & Dunne, T. (2018). After liberal world order, International Affairs 94(1), 25-40. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iix234

Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (2001). Taking stock: The constructivist research program in international relations and comparative politics, Annual Review of Political Science 4, 391-416. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.391

Hopf, T. (1998). The promise of constructivism in International Relations theory, International Security 23(1), 171-200. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539267

Gibbings, S. L. (2011). No angry women at the United Nations: Political

dreams and the cultural politics of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, International Feminist Journal of Politics 13(4), 522-538. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616742.2011.611660

Gifkins, J., & Cooper-Cunningham, D. (2023). Queering the responsibility to protect, International Affairs 99(5), 2057-2078. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiad177

Johnstone, I. (2004). US-UN relations after Iraq: The end of the world (order) as we know it? European Journal of International Law 15(4), 813-838. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/15.4.813

King, A. (2024). The collective logic of (Chinese) hegemonic order, Security Studies, 33(1), 146–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2023.2253148

Pouliot, V. (2016). International pecking orders: The politics and practices of multilateral diplomacy, Cambridge University Press.

Price, R., & Reus-Smit, C. (1998). Dangerous liaisons? Critical international theory and constructivism, European Journal of International Relations 4(3), 259-294. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066198004003001

Rutazibwa, O., & Shilliam, R. (eds.) (2018) Routledge Handbook of Postcolonial Politics, Routledge.

Seth, S. (2011) Postcolonial theory and the critique of International Relations, Millennium, 40(1), 167-183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829811412325

Simpson, G. (2004). Great power and outlaw states: Unequal sovereigns in the international legal order, Cambridge University Press.

Weber, M. (2014). Between ‘isses’ and ‘oughts’: IR constructivism, critical theory, and the challenge of political philosophy, European Journal of International Relations 20(2), 516-543. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066112466573

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics, International Organization 46(2), 391-425.