Notes

Preface and Acknowledgements

1. Jura Soyfer, The End of the World [Der Weltuntergang]. Translated by HorstJarka. In: Modern International Drama 5 No.2. (Binghamton, New York,1972).

2. ‘Full of hunger and full of bread is this earth, Full of life and full of deathis this earth, In poverty and richness borderless. Blessed and cursed is thisearth. With beauty aflame is this earth, and her future is glorious and great.’(Author’s translation.)

3. A dove alights atop a howitzer during an exercise on San Clemente Island,California on September 12, 2011. The howitzer belongs to Kilo Battery,Battalion Landing Team 3/1 of the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit.

1 The power of the ‘legions not always visible on parade’

1. James A. Bill, The Eagle and the Lion: The Tragedy of American–IranianRelations (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989), 417.

2. Winston Churchill, The Gathering Storm, The Second World War (Boston:Houghton Mifflin, 1985, 1948), 121.

3. When referring to ‘international relations’ I mean the academic sub-ject. Otherwise I will either refer to ‘international politics’, pointing outthe inter-national element and the genuine political sphere of humanconduct, or ‘global politics’, pointing toward the trans-national element.

4. Data from Monica Duffy Toft, Daniel Philpott and Timothy SamuelShah, God’s Century: Resurgent Religion and Global Politics (New York: W.W.Norton, 2011), chapter 1, and Brian J. Grim and Roger Finke, The Priceof Freedom Denied: Religious Persecution and Conflict in the 21st Century(New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011), chapter 7.

5. Hans J. Morgenthau and David Hein, Essays on Lincoln’s Faith and Politics(Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1983), 9.

6. Edward Hallett Carr, The Twenty Years’ Crisis: 1919–1939, 2nd ed.(London: Macmillan, 1946), 64.

7. William E. Scheuerman, The Realist Case for Global Reform (Cambridge:Polity Press, 2011), 100.

8. William E. Scheuerman, ‘Was Morgenthau a Realist? Revisiting scientificman vs. power politics’, Constellations 14, no. 4 (2007): 517.

9. Dag Hammarskjöld, Markings: Translated from the Swedish by Leif Sjöbergand W. H. Auden (New York: Vintage Spiritual Classics, 2006), 36.

10. Madeleine Albright, The Mighty and Almighty: Reflections on America,God and World Affairs (New York: Harper Perennial, 2006), 285. Also,

145

146 Notes

the atheist Richard Dawkins uses Lennon’s lyric, of course, argu-ing that this is a utopia, but that ‘no religion’ would be the par-adise. Richard Dawkins, ‘Imagine no religion’, http://richarddawkins.net/articles/1 (accessed 21 May 2012); see also Richard Dawkins, The GodDelusion (London: Black Swan, 2007).

11. Walt Whitman once wrote that the ‘core of democracy . . . is the religiouselement’. Albright, The Mighty and Almighty, x. Moreover, ‘[a]t their best,religion and democracy each respect the equality and value of everyhuman being: all of us stamped with the Creator’s image, each endowedwith certain inalienable rights. These doctrines sit next to one anothercomfortably; they are unifying and inclusive. Problems arise when we tryto place our own interpretation ahead of Whitman’s, arguing that thosesharing our particular understanding or the universe are more worthythan others. To have faith is to believe in the existence of absolute truth.It is quite another thing to assert that imperfect human beings can be infull possessions of this truth, or that we have a political ideology that isfully true and allows us to penalize, coerce, or abuse those who believedifferently.’ Ibid.

12. Antonia Young, ‘Religion and society in present-day Albania’, Journal ofContemporary Religion 14, no. 1 (January 1999).

13. Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics (Reading: McGraw-Hill,1979); John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York:W.W. Norton, 2001).

14. Instead of a disclaimer as to Schmitt’s past and his alignment with theNazi’s, Hans Morgenthau’s words on Schmitt should speak for themselves:‘No German political thinker of the interwar period was more amplyendowed with intellectual ability, but it is doubtful whether any surpassedhim in lack of principle and servility to his Nazi masters.’ Morgenthauends his reflections with the description of recalling, after visiting him,‘Now I have met the most evil men alive.’ Hans J. Morgenthau, ‘Fragmentof an intellectual autobiography: 1904–1932’, in Truth and Tragedy: A Trib-ute to Hans J. Morgenthau, eds. Kenneth Thompson and Robert J. Myers(New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1984), 15, 16.

15. See, among others, the one with the most appropriate title for this issue,William E. Scheuerman, ‘Another Hidden Dialogue: Hans Morgenthauand Carl Schmitt’, in Carl Schmitt: The End of Law, ed. WilliamE. Scheuerman (New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999), 225–51.

16. Robert Schuett, Political Realism, Freud, and Human Nature in Interna-tional Relations: The Resurrection of the Realist Man (New York: PalgraveMacmillan, 2009).

17. Scott M. Thomas, ‘A globalized God: Religion’s growing influence in inter-national politics’, Foreign Affairs 89, no. 6 (November/December 2010);Toft, Philpott and Shah, God’s Century. Trying to ‘reduce’ religion to avariable is foremost the case of the latter.

18. Toft, Philpott and Shah, God’s Century, 49.19. Hans J. Morgenthau, ‘Positivism, functionalism, and international law‘,

The American Journal of International Law 34, no. 2 (April 1940): 284.

Notes 147

20. Olivier Roy, ‘Why do they hate us? Not because of Iraq‘, The New YorkTimes, July 22, 2005, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/22/opinion/22roy.html?_r=2 (accessed 21 May 2012).

21. Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Powerand Peace, 2nd ed. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956), 12. See alsoMorgenthau’s ‘concept of the political’ as a corrective to the one ofSchmitt: Hans J. Morgenthau, Hartmut Behr, Felix Rösch, and MaevaVidal, The Concept of the Political (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012).

22. Thomas, ‘A globalized God‘.23. Amartya Kumar Sen, Identity and Violence (New York: Norton, 2006); James

Mellon, ‘Religion, politics and strategic studies‘, Journal of Military andStrategic Studies 5, no. 1 (Fall 2002), http://www.jmss.org/jmss/index.php/jmss/article/view/244 (accessed 21 May 2012); Richard Ned Lebow, A Cul-tural Theory of International Relations (Cambridge, New York: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2008). Regarding identity and religion as a variable see,for example, Rawi Abdelal et al., ‘Identity as a variable‘, Perspectives onPolitics 4, no. 4 (December 2006).

24. John Herz, Political Realism and Political Idealism: A Study in Theories andRealities (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951), 129; ChristianHacke and Jana Puglierin, ‘John H. Herz: Balancing utopia and reality‘,International Relations 21, no. 3 (2007); Ken Booth, ‘Navigating the “Abso-lute Novum”: John Herz’s political realism and political idealism‘, Inter-national Relations 22, no. 4 (2008); Casper Sylvest, ‘John H. Herz and theresurrection of classical realism‘, International Relations 22, no. 4 (2008);Michael C. Williams, The Realist Tradition and the Limits of InternationalRelations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

25. Carr, The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 97, 89.26. For norms dynamics and political change in general see, most promi-

nently, Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, ‘International normsdynamics and political change’, International Organization 52, no. 4(Autumn 1998).

27. Nicolas Guilhot, ‘American Katechon: When political theology becameinternational relations theory’, Constellations 17, no. 2 (2010).

28. William T. Cavanaugh, The Myth of Religious Violence: Secular Ideology andthe Roots of Modern Conflict (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).

29. Hartmut Behr and Amelia Heath, ‘Misreading in IR theory and ideol-ogy critique: Morgenthau, Waltz and Neo-Realism’, Review of InternationalStudies 35 (2009); William E. Scheuerman, ‘The (classical) Realist visionof global reform’, International Theory 2, no. 2 (2010); Joseph M. Parentand Joshua M. Baron, ‘Elder abuse: How the moderns mistreat classi-cal Realism’, International Studies Review 13 (2011). The term ‘neoclassicalRealism’ was first coined by Gideon Rose in a 1998 World Politics reviewarticle. Gideon Rose, ‘Neoclassical Realism and theories of foreign pol-icy’, World Politics 51 (October 1998). It seems, however, that NeoclassicalRealism, in the focus of its subjects, has drifted away from its classicalsources. It therefore presents more of a specific research agenda ratherthan a philosophical approach. See, for example, the work of a recent

148 Notes

Neoclassical Realist, Faared Zakraia, Fareed Zakaria, The Post-AmericanWorld: Release 2.0 (New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company,2011).

30. Scheuerman, The Realist Case for Global Reform.31. George F. Kennan, Memoiren eines Diplomaten (München: DTV, 1982), 357.

For a general introduction to the political thought of Kennan see partic-ularly his Around the Cragged Hill (New York: W.W. Norton, 1993) andJohn Lukacs, George Kennan: A Study of Character (New Haven, CT: YaleUniversity Press, 2007).

32. Georg Sorensen, ‘What kind of world order? The international system inthe new millennium’, Cooperation and Conflict 41, no. 4 (2006): 344.

33. Daniel Deudney and John G. Ikenberry, ‘The nature and sources of liberalinternational order’, Review of International Studies 25 (1999): 193.

34. Guilhot, ‘American Katechon’.35. Scott M. Thomas, ‘Taking religious and cultural pluralism seriously: The

global resurgence of religion and the transformation of internationalsociety’, Millennium 29, no. 3 (2000): 819.

36. Robert Wuthnow, ‘Understanding religion and politics’, Daedalus 120,no. 3 (Summer 1991): 11.

37. Hans J. Morgenthau, Truth and Power: Essays of a Decade, 1960–1970(New York: Praeger, 1970), 433–4. For a more comprehensive outline ofthis argument see particulary Hans Joachim Morgenthau, Scientific Manvs. Power Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946).

38. Elizabeth Shakman Hurd, The Politics of Secularism in International Rela-tions (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008).

39. Ibid., 153.40. Wuthnow, ‘Understanding Religion and Politics’, 14.41. Jonathan Kirshner, ‘The tragedy of offensive Realism: Classical Realism

and the rise of China’, European Journal of International Relations 18, no. 1(2012): 53–75.

42. Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of WorldOrder (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003); Rodger Scruton, The West andthe Rest: Globalization and the Terrorist Threat (Wilmington, DE: ISI Books,2002).

43. Grim and Finke, The Price of Freedom Denied.44. Robert O. Keohane, ‘The globalization of informal violence, theories of

world politics, and the “liberalism of fear” ’, IO-Dialogue, Spring 2002, 29.45. Carl Schmitt, Politische Theologie: Vier Kapitel zur Lehre von der Souveränität,

8th ed. (Berlin: Duncker and Humblot, 2004); Carl Schmitt, PolitischeTheologie II: Die Legende von der Erledigung jeder Politischen Theologie,4th ed. (Berlin: Duncker and Humblot, 1996); Eric Voegelin, Political Reli-gions (Lewiston, NY: E. Mellen Press, 1986); Heiner Bielefeld and HeinerHeitmeyer, eds., Politisierte Religion: Ursachen und Formen des modernenFundamentalismus (Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1998).

46. Joh Wooldridge Adrian Micklethwait, God is Back: How the Global Revivalof Faith is Challenging the World (London: Penguin Books, 2009); Thomas,‘A globalized God’; Toft, Philpott and Shah, God’s Century.

Notes 149

47. R. S. Appleby, The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, andReconciliation (Lanham MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2000).

48. Fareed Zakaria, The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home andAbroad (New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004).

49. Michael Walzer, Thinking Politically: Essays in Political Theory, Selected,edited, and with an introduction by D. Miller (New Haven, CT: YaleUniversity Press, 2007), 147–67.

50. Rudolph Otto, The Idea of the Holy (London: Oxford University Press,1923).

51. Douglas Johnston, ‘The churches and Apartheid in South Africa’, in Reli-gion: The Missing Dimension of Statecraft, ed. Douglas M. Johnston andCynthia Sampson (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 177–207.

52. Mark Juergensmeyer, Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Reli-gious Violence, 3rd ed., rev. and updated (Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, 2003).

53. Recently, however, scholars have approached just that. See, for exam-ple, Monica D. Toft, ‘Religion, Rationality, and Violence’, in Religion andInternational Relations Theory, ed. Jack L. Snyder (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 2011), 115–40.

54. Kenneth Waltz, Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis (New York:Columbia University Press, 2001).

55. Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, Steven E. Lobell, and Norrin M. Ripsman, ‘Introduc-tion: Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy’, in NeoclassicalRealism, the State, and Foreign Policy, eds. Steven E. Lobell, NorrinM. Ripsman and Jeffrey W. Taliaferro (Cambridge University Press, 2009),1–41.

56. Monica Duffy Toft, ‘Getting religion? The puzzling case of Islam and civilwar’, International Security 31, no. 4 (Spring 2007).

57. Alfred Stepan, ‘Religion, democracy, and the “twin tolerations” ’, Journalof Democracy 11, no. 4 (October 2000): 37, 42.

58. Allen Hertzke, ‘Roman Catholicism and the faith-based movement forglobal human rights’, The Review of Faith and International Affairs 3, no. 3(Winter 2005/2006): 22. On the issue of religious freedom as a sourcefor other kinds of freedom, such as political freedom, see also Grim andFinke, The Price of Freedom Denied.

59. Eric O. Hanson, The Catholic Church in World Politics (Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press, 1987), 5.

60. Barry R. Posen, ‘The security dilemma and ethnic conflict’, Survival 35,no. 1 (Spring 1993).

2 The resurgence of religion in global politics

1. Pippa Norris and Ronald Ingelhart, Sacred and Secular: Religion and PoliticsWorldwide (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).

2. Peter L. Berger, Grace Davie and Effie Fokas, Religious America, SecularEurope? A Theme and Variations (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010).

150 Notes

3. Grace Davie, Europe: The Exceptional Case: Parameters of Faith in the Mod-ern World (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 2002); Jeffrey Haynes,An Introduction to International Relations and Religion (Harlow: Pearson,2007), 20.

4. Jonathan Fox, ‘Religion and state failure: An examination of the extentand magnitude of religious conflicts from 1950 to 1996’, InternationalPolitical Science Review 25, no. 1 (2004); Jonathan Fox, ‘State failure andthe clash of civilisations: an examination of the magnitude and extentof domestic civilizational conflict from 1950 to 1996’, Australian Journalof Political Science 38, no. 2 (July 2003).

5. Scott M. Thomas, ‘Outwitting the developed countries? existential inse-curity and the global resurgence of religion’, Journal of InternationalAffairs 61, no. 1 (Fall/Winter 2007): 22.

6. Olivier Roy, ‘Révolution post-islamiste’, LeMonde, February 12,2011, http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2011/02/12/revolution-post-islamiste_1478858_3232.html (accessed 22 May 2012).

7. Thomas, ‘Outwitting the developed countries?’, 40. An importantattempt in terms of international relations theory to explain the globalreligious resurgence, because religion likely transcends borders, refers tothe linkage politics in terms of James Rosenau as well as Keohane andNye’s world politics paradigm. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph Nye, eds.,Transnational Relations and World Politics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni-versity Press, 1970); James N. Rosenau, Linkage Politics (New York: FreePress, 1969); Robert O. Keohane and Joseph Nye, Power and Independence:World Power in Transition (Boston: Little, Brown, 1977).

8. Hurd, The Politics of Secularism in International Relations.9. Scott M. Thomas, The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation

of International Relations: The Struggle for the Soul of the Twenty-first Century(New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 26.

10. Ibid., 1–10.11. Jeffrey Haynes, ‘Religion and international relations after “9/11” ’,

Democratization 12, no. 3 (June 2005): 401–2., Jeffrey Haynes, Religionin Third World Politics (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1994),12–13.

12. Thomas, The Global Resurgence of Religion, 21–45.13. Mark Juergensmeyer, The New Cold War? Religious Nationalism Confronts

the Secular State (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1994), 3. Seealso Mark Juergensmeyer, Global Rebellion: Religious Challenges to the Sec-ular State from Christian Militias to Al Qaeda, Rev. ed. (Berkeley: Universityof California Press, 2008).

14. Hurd, The Politics of Secularism in International Relations, 23. Secularismthus should rather be defined as ‘a political negotiation over theaccepted role of religion in public life rather that as an a priori category’.Maia C. Hallward, ‘Situating the “secular”: Negotiating the boundarybetween religion and politics’, International Political Sociology 2, no. 1(2008): 1.

Notes 151

15. Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology(New York: Simon & Schuster, 1984); Peter L. Berger, The Social Real-ity of Religion (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969); Peter L. Berger, ‘Thedesecularization of the world: A global overview’, in The Desecularizationof the World. Resurgent Religion and World Politics, ed. Peter L. Berger(Washington, DC: Ethics and Public Policy Center, 1999), 1–18.

16. Toft, Philpott and Shah, God’s Century, 74.17. Elizabeth S. Hurd, ‘Theorizing religious resurgence’, International Politics

44, no. 6 (2007): 653. ‘Conflicts between fundamentalists and secular-ists, therefore, are not simply about “religion” or “politics”, but arecultural battles over the very definition of these terms.’ Wuthnow,‘Understanding religion and politics’, 16.

18. Peter L. Berger, ‘Secularization falsified’, First Things, February 2008.19. Berger, ‘Secularization falsified’, 24; José Casanova, ‘Aggiornamenti?

Katholische und muslimische Politik im Vergleich’, Leviathan 34, no. 3(September 2006); David Martin, ‘The evangelical upsurge and its polit-ical implications’, in The Desecularization of the World. Resurgent Religionand World Politics, ed. Peter L. Berger (Washington, DC: Ethics and PublicPolicy Center, 1999), 37–49; David Martin, Tongues of Fire: The Explosionof Protestantism in Latin America (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993).

20. Berger, ‘Secularization falsified’, 23–4.21. Wuthnow, ‘Understanding religion and politics’, 2–3, 5.22. ‘The expression “the global covenant” is . . . intended to emphasize

that contemporary international relations is far more than a narrowlydefined Machiavellian world of power politics but is also far from anexpansively defined Kantian community of mankind. It is an intermedi-ate world between these extremes: a world of dialogue between separatebut recognized political others. The global covenant constitutes the onlystandards of political conduct which apply around the world and areacknowledged as such. It connects human beings everywhere throughtheir membership in a sovereign state and regardless of any particu-lar characteristics they disclose regarding their domestic way of life.’Robert Jackson, The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States(New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 16.

23. Ibid., 408.24. Ibid., 23.25. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, 4.26. Hans J. Morgenthau, ‘The moral blindness of scientific man’, in Inter-

national Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, eds. RobertJ. Art and Robert Jervis, 4th ed. (New York: Harper Collins, 1996), 7–16;Scheuerman, ‘Was Morgenthau a Realist?’, 508.

27. Scheuerman, ‘Was Morgenthau a Realist?’, 511; Chantal Mouffe, On thePolitical (London: Routledge, 2006).

28. Carl Schmitt, ‘The age of neutralizations and depoliticizations’, Telos96 (1993); Trans. John P. Mc-Cormick and Matthias Konzett; RolandAxtmann, ‘Humanity or enmity? Carl Schmitt on international politics’,International Politics 44 (2007); Guilhot, ‘American Katechon’.

152 Notes

29. Scheuerman, ‘Was Morgenthau a Realist?’, 524, 511.30. David Cortright, Peace: A History of Movements and Ideas (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2008), 4.31. Scheuerman, ‘Was Morgenthau a Realist?’, 517.32. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, 184.33. Hans J. Morgenthau, ‘The rediscovery of imagination and religion:

Arnold Toynbee’, Dilemmas in Democratic Politics, 1955, 374.34. Scheuerman, ‘Was Morgenthau a Realist?’, 519.35. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, 13.36. Jan Assmann, Die mosaische Unterscheidung oder der Preis des

Monotheismus (München; Wien: Hanser, 2003); Jan Assmann, Moses inÄgypten: Entzifferung einer Gedächtnisspur, 5th ed. (Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer,2001). It is, however, important to note that Assmann stresses the impor-tance of acknowledging the observation that the visual (biblical) speechof monotheism has to be understood in its historical context. Violentspeech is a warning sign against the danger of assimilation and of fallingback to older forms of existence. Thus Assmann stresses that violence isno unconditional inherent part of monotheism but rather an answerto the political pressure from which monotheism will get free. Seealso Jan Assmann, ‘Monotheismus und die Sprache der Gewalt’, in DasGewaltpotential des Monotheismus und der dreieine Gott, ed. Peter Walter(Freiburg i.Br.: Herder, 2005), 18–39; Rodney Stark, One True God: His-torical Consequences of Monotheism (Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress, 2001).

37. Regina Schwartz, The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997); Hector Avalos, FightingWords: The Origins of Religious Violence (New York: Prometheus Books,2005); Charles Kimball, When Religion Becomes Evil: Five Warning Signs(San Francisco: Harper Collins, 2003).

38. John A. Rees, ‘ “Really Existing” scriptures: On the use of sacred textin international affairs’, The Brandywine Review of Faith & InternationalAffairs 2, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 18.

39. Joseph R. Hoffmann, ‘Positioning the question of religious violence’, inThe Just War and Jihad: Violence in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, ed.Joseph R. Hoffmann (New York: Prometheus Books, 2006), 47–62, 59.It is only logical that ‘it is a part of the nature of religious communitiesto gain their identity through conflict and tension with out-group cul-tures’. James K. Wellmann, Jr and Kyoko Tokuno, ‘Is religious violenceinevitable?’, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 43, no. 2 (2004):292. See also Lewis A. Coser, The Function of Social Conflict (New York:Free Press, 1956).

40. Hammarskjöld, Markings, 140.41. Charles K. Bellinger, ‘Understanding violence: The new Copernican Rev-

olution’, in The Just War and Jihad: Violence in Judaism, Christianity, andIslam, ed. Joseph R. Hoffmann (New York: Prometheus Books, 2006),63–76, 64–5.

Notes 153

42. Reinhold Niehbuhr, Christianity and Power Politics (New York: CharlesScribner’s Sons, 1940), 14.

43. Raymund Schwager, Jesus im Heilsdrama: Entwurf einer biblischenErlösungslehre, 2nd ed. (Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1996), 244.

44. Pauletta Otis, ‘Religion and war in the twenty-first century’, in Religionand Security: The new Nexus in International Relations, ed. Robert A. Seipleand Dennis R. Hoover (Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2004),11–24, 16.

45. John J. Mearsheimer, ‘Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after theCold War’, International Security 15, 5–56 (1990); Robert D. Kaplan, TheComing Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War (New York:Vintage Books, 2001).

46. The Obama administration changed this term to ‘Overseas ContingencyOperation’.

47. Andreas Hasenclever and Volker Rittberger, ‘Does religion make a differ-ence? Theoretical approaches to the impact of faith on political conflict’,Millennium – Journal of International Studies 29, no. 3 (2000). AndreasHasenclever and Volker Rittberger, ‘Does religion make a difference?Theoretical approaches to the impact of faith on political conflict’,in Religion in International Relations: The Return from Exile, ed. Pavlosa. P. F. Hatzopoulos (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), 107–45.

48. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations; Gilles Kepel, The Revenge of God:The Resurgence of Islam, Christianity and Judaism in the Modern World(Cambridge: Polity, 1994); Bassam Tibi, Krieg der Zivilisationen: Politik undReligion zwischen Vernunft und Fundamentalismus (Hamburg: Hoffmannund Kampe, 1995); Bassam Tibi, Islamischer Fundamentalismus, moderneWissenschaft und Technologie, 2nd ed. (Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp,1993). Bassam Tibi exemplarily describes the politicization of religionas a result of the escalation of already existent cultural cleavages.Bassam Tibi, Die neue Weltunordnung: Westliche Dominanz und islamischerFundamentalismus, 2nd ed. (München: Econ Ullstein, 2001), 228.

49. Interests are always based on identity and identity-formation. Lebow,A Cultural Theory of International Relations, 558–70.

50. Richard N. Lebow, ‘Identity and international relations’, InternationalRelations 22, no. 4 (2008).

51. Kofi A. Annan, ‘Vereint gegen den Terrorismus’, Frankfurter AllgemeineZeitung, 22/23 September 2001. Author’s translation.

52. Graham Fuller, ‘The next ideology’, Foreign Policy, no. 98 (1995); TedR. Gurr, ‘Minorities, nationalists, and ethnopolitical conflict’, in Man-aging Global Chaos: Sources of and Responses to International Conflict,ed. Chester A. Crocker, Fen H. Osler and Pamela Aall (WashingtonDC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1996); Dieter Senghaas,Zivilisierung wider Willen: Der Konflikt der Kulturen mit sich Selbst(Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1998); Errol A. Henderson and RichardTucker, ‘Clear and present strangers: The clash of civilizations and inter-national conflict’, International Studies Quarterly 45 (2001); Indra Soysa

154 Notes

and Ragnhild Nordas, ‘Islam’s bloody innards? Religion and politicalterror, 1980–2000’, International Studies Quarterly 51 (2007).

53. John Rawls, Political Liberalism, Exp. ed. (New York: Columbia Univer-sity Press, 2005), 133–72; Andrew F. March, ‘Reading Tariq Ramadan:Political liberalism, Islam, and “Overlapping consensus”, Ethics andInternational Affairs 21, no. 4 (Winter 2007).

54. Hasenclever and Rittberger, ‘Does religion make a difference?’, 647;Emanuel Adler, ‘Seizing the middle ground: Constructivism in worldpolitics’, European Journal of International Relations 3, no. 3 (1997);Stefano Guzzini, ‘A reconstruction of Constructivism in internationalrelations’, European Journal of International Relations 6, no. 2 (2000); TedHopf, ‘The promise of Constructivism in international relations theory’,International Security 23, no. 1 (1998); Alexander Wendt, Social Theoryof International Politics, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008),20–1; Hopf, ‘The promise of Constructivism in International RelationsTheory’, Lewis W. Snyder, Growth, Debt, and Politics: Economic Adjust-ment and the Political Performance of Developing Countries (Boulder, CO:Westview Press, 1996); Valery Tishkov, Ethnicity, Nationalism and Con-flicts in and after the Soviet Union: The Mind Aflame (London: Sage, 1997);Carsten Bagge Lausten and Ole Waever, ‘In defence of religion: Sacredreferent objects for securitization’, Millennium – Journal of InternationalStudies 29, no. 3 (2000); Andreas Hasenclever and Alexander DeJuan,‘Grasping the impact of religious traditions on political conflicts: Empir-ical findings and theoretical perspectives’, Die Friedenswarte. Journal ofInternational Peace and Organization 82, 2–3 (2007).

55. Hasenclever and Rittberger, ‘Does religion make a difference?’, 651.56. The most prominent approach of an implementation of this strategy

is the project of the Weltethos represented by the German theologianHans Küng. Hans Küng and Karl J. Kuschel, Erklärung zum Weltethos: DieDeklaration des Parlaments der Weltreligionen (München: Piper, 1993).

57. See, for example, Scott M. Thomas, ‘Living critically and “Living Faith-fully” in a global age: Justice, emancipation and the political theology ofinternational relations’, Millennium – Journal of International Studies 39,no. 2 (2010).

58. Thomas, The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation ofInternational Relations, 121–30.

59. Daniel Philpott, Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas shaped ModernInternational Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001).

60. Daniel Philpott, ‘Explaining the political ambivalence of religion’,American Political Science Review 101, no. 3 (August 2007): 506–7. Seealso Toft, Philpott and Shah, God’s Century.

61. Duffy Toft, ‘Getting religion?’, 128.62. Marc Gopin, Between Eden and Armageddon: The Future of World Reli-

gions, Violence, and Peacemaking (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000);Mohammed Abu-Nimer, Nonviolence and Peacebuilding in Islam: Theoryand Practice (Gainsville: University Press of Florida, 2003); Harold Cow-ard and Gordon S. Smith, eds., Religion and Peacebuilding (Albany: State

Notes 155

University of New York Press, 2004). Nevertheless, it has to be men-tioned that the ‘preference’ of and for religion can be questioned. JoshuaMitchell, for example, makes the argument that religion is not a prefer-ence. Joshua Mitchell, ‘Religion is not a preference’, The Journal of Politics69, no. 2 (May 2007).

63. Duffy Toft, ‘Getting religion?’, 129; 130.64. Olivier Roy, Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah (New York:

Columbia University Press, 2004). ‘Deculturalization’ is the major rea-son, Roy points out, for current conflicts related to religion. Olivier Roy,Holy Ignorance: When Religion and Culture part Ways (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 2010).

65. Navid Kermani, ‘Die Terroristen sind unter uns’, Die Zeit, September 28,2006, 40.

66. Reza Sha-Kazemi, The Other in the Light of the One: Universalityof the Qur’an and Interfaith Dialogue (Cambridge: The Islamic TextsSociety, 2006), viii-iv. See also Andreas Hasenclever, ‘Merkmale gewaltre-sistenter Glaubensgemeinschaften: Überlegungen zum Schutz religiöserÜberlieferung vor politischer Vereinnahmung’, in FriedensstiftendeReligionen? Religion und die Deeskalation politischer Konflikte, ed.Manfred Brocker and Mathias Hildebrandt (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fürSozialwissenschaften, 2008), 179–201.

67. Marc Gopin, Holy War, Holy Peace: How Religion can bring Peace to theMiddle East (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).

68. Peter L. Berger, ‘The desecularization of the world: A global overview’, inThe Desecularization of the World. Resurgent Religion and World Politics, ed.Peter L. Berger (Washington, DC: Ethics and Public Policy Center, 1999),1–18, 7.

69. Haynes, An Introduction to International Relations and Religion, 40–1. Seealso, most prominently, Joseph S. Nye, Soft Power: The Means to Successin World Politics (New York: Public Affairs, 2004).

70. Bagge Lausten and Waever, ‘In defence of religion’, 733.71. Michael Barnett, ‘Another Great Awakening? International Relations

Theory and Religion’, in Religion and International Relations Theory, ed.Jack L. Snyder (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011), 91–114,107.

72. ‘[T]ransnational religious networks can be influential motivators of,as well as participants in, conflict; they can also be independentlysignificant in promoting various normatively ‘progressive‘ objectives,including: peace, inter-group understanding, cooperation and humandevelopment.’ Haynes, An Introduction to International Relations and Reli-gion, 44. See also Magaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists BeyondBorders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca, NY: CornellUniversity Press, 1998).

73. ‘[T]ransnational ideas urge a transnational course of action on adher-ents, typically containing a coherent set of symbols, such as the Bible,the Quran, or The Communist Manifest, and leading prophets (Jesus,Mohammed or Marx). Transnational ideas can be examined as a form

156 Notes

of ‘soft power‘ in world politics, that is, attractive ideas that can becontrasted with ‘hard’ power (military or economic muscle).’ Haynes,An Introduction to International Relations and Religion, 45. See also Nye,Soft Power.

74. For this and similar notions see Hanson, The Catholic Church in WorldPolitics.

75. Ronnie Lipschutz, ‘Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence ofGlobal Civil Society’, Millennium – Journal of International Studies 21,no. 3 (1992); Paul Wapner, ‘Politics beyond the State: EnvironmentalActivism and World Civic Politics’, World Politics 47 (April 1995).

76. Magaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, ‘Transnational Advocay Networksin International Politics: Introduction’, in Essential Readings in World Pol-itics, ed. Karen A. Mingst and Jack L. Snyder, 2nd ed. (New York: Norton,2004), 222–33, 226.

77. Ernst Gellner, Conditions of Liberty: Civil Society and its Rivals (London:Hamish Hamilton, 1994), 5.

78. Peter L. Berger, ‘Religion and Global Civil Society’, in Religion in GlobalCivil Society, ed. Mark Juergensmeyer (Oxford: Oxford University Press,2005), 11–22.

79. Fred Halliday, ‘The Romance of Non-State Actors’, in Non-State Actors inWorld Politics, ed. Daphne a. W. W. Josselin (New York: Palgrave, 2001),21–40.

80. Susann H. Rudolph, ‘Introduction: Religion, States, and TransnationalCivil Society’, in Transnational Religion and Fading States, ed. SusannH. Rudolph (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1997), 1–24, 2. Regard-ing religion, Rudolph speaks of a likehood of a ‘universal reli-giosity’ grounded in the principle that there is truth in allreligions (‘transnational ecumenism’). Susann H. Rudolph, ‘Reli-gious Transnationalism’, in Religion in Global Civil Society, ed. MarkJuergensmeyer (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 189–200.

81. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.82. Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics,

3rd ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 97–121. For thebalance of power theory see particularly Richard Little, The Balance ofPower in International Relations: Metaphors, Myths, and Models (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2009).

83. Schmitt, ‘The age of neutralizations and depoliticizations’.84. This is a point which Robert Kaplan frequently stresses. See, for exam-

ple, Kaplan, The Coming Anarchy; Robert D. Kaplan, Warrior Politics: WhyLeadership demands a Pagan Ethos (New York: Random House, 2002).

85. David C. Rapoport, ‘The Fourth Wave: September 22 in the History ofTerrorism’, Current History, December 2001.

86. Juergensmeyer, The New Cold War?87. Schmitt, Politische Theologie. Although we can observe some elements of

that approach in the rhetoric of political leaders.88. Voegelin, Political Religions. Voegelin’s approach is particularly useful in

the analysis of highly ideologized regimes like Nationalsocialism, whichused religious elements in their political architecture.

Notes 157

89. Raja C. Mohan, ‘Catharsis and Catalysis: Transforming the South AsianSubcontinent’, in Worlds in Collision: Terror and the Future of Global Order,ed. Ken Booth and Timothy Dunne (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,2004), 205–14.

90. ‘It is the peculiar characteristic of the situation I am describing – thesituation of what I should call Hobbesian fear – that you yourself mayvividly feel the terrible fear that you have of the other party, but you can-not enter into the other man’s counter-fear, or even understand why heshould be particularly nervous.’ Herbert Butterfield, History and HumanRelations (London: Harper Collins, 1951), 21.

91. For the following indicators see Rudolf Burger, Retheologisierung derPolitik und weltpolitische Konfliktkonstellationen (Wien: Schriftenreihe derLandesverteidigungsakademie, 2004), 16–20.

92. William D. Casebeer, ‘Knowing evil when you see it: Uses for the rhetoricof evil in international relations’, International Relations 18, no. 4 (2004);Joseph R. Hoffmann, ed., The Just War and Jihad: Violence in Judaism,Christianity, and Islam (New York: Prometheus Books, 2006).

93. Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political (Chicago Ill.: University ofChicago Press, 1996).

94. Carl Schmitt, Ex Captivitate Salus: Erfahrungen aus der Zeit 1945/47 (Köln:Greven Verlag, 1950), 89–90. Author’s translation.

95. Lebow, ‘Identity and international relations’, See also Allport’s study,first published in 1954, suggesting that in-group attachment does notrequire hostility against any other stereotype like out-group. GordonW. Allport and Kenneth Clark, The Nature of Prejudice, 25th anniversaryed., unabridged. (Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books, 2003).

96. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations.97. René Girard, Das Ende der Gewalt: Analyse des Menschheitsverhängnisses

(Freiburg im Breisgau, Wien: Herder, 1983), 87.98. G. I. A. D. Draper, ‘The Christian and war’, International Relations 2, no. 6

(1962): 397.99. Guilhot, ‘American Katechon’.

100. Dennis Ross, Statecraft: And How to Restore America’s Standing in the World(New York: Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2007).

101. Stewart Patrick, Weak Links: Fragile States, Global Threats, and Interna-tional Security (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).

102. Alexander Lee, ‘Who becomes a terrorist? Poverty, education, and theorigins of political violence’, World Politics 63, no. 2 (2011): 242.

103. Joseph S. Nye, ‘Get smart: Combining hard and soft power’, ForeignAffairs, July/August 2009.

104. Francis Fukuyama even asked if ‘the West’ is really a ‘coherent con-cept’ since ‘an enormous gulf has opened up in American and Europeanperceptions about the world, and the sense of shared values is increas-ingly frayed.’ Francis Fukuyama, ‘The West May be Coming Apart’, TheStraits Times, August 10, 2002, http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27b/094.html (accessed 23 May 2012).

158 Notes

105. Thomas Hobbes, The Leviathan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1991). See also Wolfgang Sofsky, ‘Kehren wir zurück in normale, his-torisch, gefährliche Zeiten’, Süddeutsche Zeitung, August 24, 2006, 194;Wolfgang Palaver, ‘Hobbes and the Katéchon: The secularization of sacri-ficial Christianity’, Contagion: Journal of Violence, Mimesis, and Culture 2(Spring 1995).

106. Ian Hall, The International Thought of Martin Wight (New York: PalgraveMacmillan, 2006), 102.

107. Timothy J Lynch, ‘Kristol Balls: Neoconservative visions of Islam and theMiddle East’, International Politics 45 (2008): 205–6.

3 The Christian context: religion as being

1. Lucian Leustean, for example, illustrates that ‘1. Religion and politics areanalysed from the perspective of the relationship between the institution-alized religion and the state: church–state relations, the legal positionof churches within the state, the role of churches in political conflicts,democracy and religion, etc. Religion and politics, as major societal ele-ments, are analysed by the specific methodologies of the sociology ofreligion. 2. Religion and politics are analysed from the perspective of thecreation of the nation-state and their reciprocal role in the nation andinternational-building process, especially as reflected after the Peace ofWestphalia (1648). Religion is studied as a field of research in the study ofinternational relations.’ Lucian N. Leustean, ‘Towards an integrative the-ory of religion and politics’, Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 17(2005): 367.

2. Clifford Geertz, ‘Religion as a cultural system’, in AnthropologicalApproaches to the Study of Religion, ed. Michael Banton (London: TavistockPublications, 1966), 1–46, 4., Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures(New York: Basic Books, 1973).

3. Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, translated byJoseph Ward Sawin (New York: The Free Press, 1947), 24.

4. Religion, for example, as Jeffrey Haynes puts it, ‘is normally approached(a) from the perspective of a body of ideas and outlooks, that is, as the-ology and ethical code; (b) as a type of formal organisation, that is, theecclesiastical “Church”; or (c) as a social group, that is, religious groupsand movements. There are two basic ways in which religion affects thetemporal world: by what it say and by what it does. The former relatesto religion’s doctrine or theology, the latter to its importance as a socialphenomenon and mark of identity, working through a variety of modelsof institutionalisation, such as political parties and Church–State rela-tions.’ Jeffrey Haynes, Religion in Global Politics (London and New York:Longman, 1998), 4–5.

5. Leustean, ‘Towards an integrative theory of religion and politics’, 371. Seealso John T. S. Madeley, Religion and Politics (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002).

6. Voegelin, Political Religions; Alan Dundes, Sacred Narrative. Readings in theTheory of Myth (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984); Henry

Notes 159

Tudor, Political Myth (London: Pall Mall Press, 1972); Elias Canetti, Crowdsand Power (New York: Farrar Straus Giroux, 1984).

7. ‘Politics separated from religion . . . that all the crusaders, religious andsecular alike, are denied the sword . . . is an open-ended conflict over inter-ests and values among people who understand that they have to co-existwith one another. . . . We have to set ourselves against the closure thatGod’s name . . . has licensed–but also against every other kind of closures,licensed by any of the secular substitutes for God’s name. Only some-one who has never experienced, or who can’t imagine experiencing thedangers of politics gone bad could possibly complain about that.’ Walzer,Thinking Politically, 164.

8. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations, 12.9. A. J. H. Murray, ‘The moral politics of Hans Morgenthau’, The Review of

Politics 58, no. 1 (Winter 1996).10. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, 168, 177.11. Bagge Lausten and Waever, ‘In defence of religion’, 710. See also

Slavoj Zizek, ‘Holding the place’, in Contingency, Hegemony, Universality-Contemporary Dialogues of the Left, ed. Judith Butler, Ernesto Laclau andSlavoj Zizek (London: Verso, 2000), 315–6.

12. Bagge Lausten and Waever, ‘In defence of religion’, 710–11.13. Ibid., 719.14. Francis Fukuyama, ‘History and September 11’, in Worlds in Collision:

Terror and the Future of Global Order, ed. Ken Booth and Timothy Dunne(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 27–36, 30.

15. Herbert Butterfield, Christianity, Diplomacy and War (New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1954), 3.

16. Bagge Lausten and Waever, ‘In defence of religion’, 733. In other words, inthe context of what this study calls being, it is important to recognize thefact that every religious world insight points towards the transcendence.This implies that man is not simply an instrumental being but rather onewithout any special purpose.

17. René Girard, The Scapegoat (Baltimore MD: John Hopkins University Press,1986); René Girard, Violence and the Sacred (London: Athlone Press, 1988);Robert Hamerton-Kelly, ed., Violent Origins. Walter Burkert, René Girard andJonathan Z. Smith on Ritual Killing and Cultural Formation (Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press, 1987); Giles Fraser, Christianity and Violence:Girard, Nietzsche, Anselm and Tutu (London: Darton, Longman and Todd,2001).

18. Plato, The Republic, translated by T. Griffith, edited by G.R.F. Ferraris(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 205; Augustine, trans-lated by H. Bettension, Concerning the City of God Against the Pagans(London: Penguin Books, 2003), 324.

19. Wolfgang Palaver, ‘René Girard’s Contribution to Political Theology:Overcoming Deadlocks of Competition and Enmity’, in Between Philos-ophy and Theology: Contemporary Interpretations of Christianity, ed. L. Boeveand Christophe Brabant (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2010), 149–65, 159.Especially the biblical Decalogue addresses this problem by stating that

160 Notes

‘You shall not covet your neighbor’s house, you shall not covet yourneighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, of donkey, or anythingthat belongs to your neighbor.’ Exodus 20: 17.

20. Palaver, ‘René Girard’s contribution to political theology’, 159. See alsoWolfgang Palaver, ‘Envy or emulation: A Christian understanding ofeconomic passions’, in Passions in Economy, Politics, and the Media:In Discussion with Christian Theology, ed. Wolfgang Palaver and PetraSteinmair-Pösel (Münster: LIT, 2005), 139–62, 150–1.

21. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, 209.22. John Paul II, ‘Address to the United Nations General Assembly’, http://

www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02u1.htm (accessed 22 May 2012).23. René Girard, with Pierpaolo Antonello at Joao Cezar de Castro Rocha,

Evolution and Conversion: Dialogues on the Origin of Culture (London:Continuum, 2008, original edition 2000), 59–60.

24. René Girard, ‘Triangular desire’, in The Girard Reader, ed. René Girard andJames G. Williams (New York: Crossroad and Herder, 1996), 33–44.

25. Thomas, The Global Resurgence of Religion, 124.26. René Girard, A Theater of Envy: William Shakespeare (Oxford: Oxford Uni-

versity Press, 1991), 186. See also René Girard, Things Hidden since theFoundation of the World: Research Undertaken in Collaboration with Jean-Michel Ougourlian and Guy Lefort, translated by Stephen Bann (BooksII and III) and Michael Metteer (Book I) (London: Athlone Press,1987), 26.

27. Wolfgang Palaver, ‘Rene Girard’s contribution to political theology: Over-coming deadlocks of competition and enmity’, in Between Philosophy andTheology: Contemporary Interpretations of Christianity, ed. L. Boeve andChristophe Brabant (Burlington VT: Ashgate, 2010), 149–65, 153.

28. Jürgen Habermas, Glauben und Wissen (Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 2001),24. See also Austin Dacey, The Secular Conscience: Why Belief Belongs inPublic Life (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2008).

29. John 1: 9–11, New International Version.30. Nick Megoran, ‘Christianity and political geography: On faith and geopo-

litical imagination’, The Brandywine Review of Faith and International Affairs2, no. 2 (Fall 2004): 42.

31. Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity,Otherness, and Reconciliation (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1996).

32. Voegelin, Political Religions.33. Manuel Fröhlich, Dag Hammarskjöld und die Vereinten Nationen: Die

politische Ethik des Generalsekretärs (Paderborn: Schöhning, 2002), 166–8;Alynna J. Lyon, ‘The UN Charter, the New Testament, and the Psalms:The moral authority of Dag Hammarskjöld’, in The UN Secretary-Generaland Moral Authority: Ethics and Religion in International Leadership, ed. KentJ. Kille (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2007), 111–41.

34. Fred Dallmayr, ‘A global spiritual resurgence? On Christian and Islamicspiritualities’, in Religion in International Relations: The Return from Exile,ed. Pavlos a. P. F. Hatzopoulos (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003),209–36, 218.

35. Hammarskjöld, Markings, 57.36. Ibid., 90.37. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, 5.

Notes 161

4 The unending struggle: in and outside the box

1. ‘The study of international affairs is best understood as a protractedcompetition between the realist, liberal, and radical traditions. Realismemphasizes the enduring propensity for conflict between states; liberal-ism identifies several ways to mitigate these conflictive tendencies; andthe radical tradition describes how the entire system of state relationsmight be transformed. The boundaries between these traditions are some-what fuzzy and a number of important works do not fit neatly into anyof them, but debates within and among them have largely defined thediscipline.’ Stephen M. Walt, ‘One world, many theories’, Foreign Policy110 (Spring 1998): 29. See also Carolin Kennedy-Pipe, ‘International his-tory and international relations theory: a dialogue beyond the Cold War’,International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000).

2. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, 1–40, 204–23; MortonA. Kaplan, ‘The new Great Debate: Traditionalism vs. science in inter-national relations’, World Politics 19, no. 1 (1966); Roderick C. Ogley,‘International relations: Poetry, prescription or science?’, Millennium –Journal of International Studies 10, no. 2 (1981); Edward Hallett Carr, TheTwenty Years’ Crisis 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of InternationalRelations, Reiss. with a new introd. and additional material, 1. publ. byMichael Cox (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2001), 22–94.

3. Charles A. Jones, ‘Christian Realism and the foundations of the EnglishSchool’, International Relations 17, no. 3 (2003); John Williams, ‘HedleyBull and Just War: Missed opportunities and lessons to be learned’,European Journal of International Relations 16, no. 2 (2010).

4. Ray Maghroori and Bennett Ramberg, eds., Globalism versus Realism:International Relations’ Third Debate (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1982);Robert Jervis, ‘Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understandingthe debate’, International Security 24, no. 1 (1999); Michael Brecher andFrank P. Harvey, eds., Realism and Institutionalism in International Studies(Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002); Robert O. Keohane,ed., Neorealism and its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press,1986); David A. Baldwin, ed., Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Con-temporary Debate (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993); CharlesW. Kegley, ed., Controversies in International Relations Theory: Realism andthe Neoliberal Challenge (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1995).

5. Of course, one can question the usefulness of the distinction of thosedebates and their characteristics. Although I am not fond of it, I stillcan find some useful aspects in it, particularly that most scholars ofinternational relations identify themselves with these debates since theyguide the way for a better understanding of the discipline’s historicaldevelopment. However, the approach here presented of the discipline’shistory has in mind that those ‘great debates’ are rather a ‘myth’. PeterWilson, ‘The myth of the “First Great Debate” ’, Review of InternationalStudies 24 (1998). See also Brian C. Schmidt, The Political Discourse ofAnarchy: A Disciplinary History of International Relations (Albany, NY: State

162 Notes

University of New York Press, 1998); Brian C. Schmidt, ‘The RockefellerFoundation Conference and the long road to a theory of internationalpolitics’, in The Invention of International Relations Theory: Realism, theRockefeller Foundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory, ed. NicolasGuilhot (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011), 79–96.

6. Nicholas G. Onuf, World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory andInternational Relations (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press,1989); Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics; Alexander Wendt,‘Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of powerpolitics’, International Organization 42, no. 2 (Spring 1992); VendulkaKubálková, Nicholas G. Onuf and Paul Kowert, eds., International Rela-tions in a Constructed World (Armonk, NJ: Sharpe, 1998); Claire T. Sjolanderand Wayne S. Cox, eds., Beyond Positivism: Critical Reflections on Interna-tional Relations (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994); Wendt, Social Theoryof International Politics.

7. For such approaches see, although not in a systematic manner, for exam-ple, Nukhet A. Sandal and Patrick James, ‘Religion and internationalrelations theory: Towards a mutual understanding’, European Journal ofInternational Relations, OnlineFirst, published on July 27 (2010); JackL. Snyder, ed., Religion and International Relations Theory (New York:Columbia University Press, 2011). For an evaluation and consequent cri-tique of virtually all such efforts see Timothy Fitzgerald, Religion andPolitics in International Relations: The Modern Myth (New York: Continuum,2011).

8. Alasdair MacIntyre’s approach has been integrated into the theoriesof international relations by the efforts of Scott Thomas, The GlobalResurgence of Religion and the Transformation of International Relations,85–93.

9. Vendulka Kubálková, ‘Towards an international political theology’,Millennium – Journal of International Studies 29, no. 3 (2000); VendulkaKubálková, ‘A “turn to religion” in international relations?’, Perspectives:Central European Review of International Affairs 17, no. 2 (2009).

10. Gertjan Dijkink, ‘When geopolitics and religion fuse: A historical perspec-tive’, Geopolitics 11 (2006); John Agnew, ‘Deus Vult: The geopolitics of theCatholic Church’, Geopolitics 15 (2010). See also Monica Duffy Toft’s workon this issue, for example, Duffy Toft, ‘Getting religion?’; Monica D. Toft,‘Religion, rationality, and violence’, in Snyder, Religion and InternationalRelations Theory.

11. Walter R. Mead, ‘God’s country?’, Foreign Affairs 85, no. 5 (September/October 2006).

12. James C. Scott, Seeing like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve theHuman Condition Have Failed (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,1998).

13. Waltz, Theory of International Politics. On a closer look, however, this isnot the case. This is because Waltz stresses with the term ‘system’ only asingle area – the ‘third image’ (international politics) – within a structure

Notes 163

influencing the behavior of its units (primarily states). Waltz, Man, theState and War.

14. Scott, Seeing Like a State, 92–93.15. Nevertheless, liberal theories developed some significant power of anal-

ysis concerning taking religion, especially politicized ones seriously ininternational relations. See, for example, Fiona B. Adamson, ‘Globalliberalism versus political Islam: competing ideological frameworks ininternational politics’, International Studies Review 7 (2005).

16. See, for example, James Brassett and Dan Bulley, ‘Ethics in world politics:cosmopolitanism and beyond?’, International Politics 44 (2007).

17. Yosef Lapid and Friedrich Kratochwil, eds., The Return of Culture and Iden-tity in International Relations Theory (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1996);Helen James, ed., Civil Society, Religion and Gobal Gvernance: Paradigms ofPower and Persuasion (New York: Routledge, 2007); Haynes, An Introductionto International Relations and Religion, 31–62; Lebow, A Cultural Theory ofInternational Relations.

18. Keohane, ‘The Globalization of Informal Violence’, 29.19. Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy, The Preacher and the Presidents: Billy

Graham in the White House (New York: Center Street, 2007); JasonD. Berggen and Nicole C. Rae, ‘Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush: Faith,foreign policy, and an evangelical presidential style’, Presidential StudiesQuarterly 36, no. 4 (December 2006); Arthur Schlesinger, Jr and MartinE. Marty, ‘Bush’s righteous empire’, New Perspectives Quarterly 22, no. 1(Winter 2005).

20. Vendulka Kubálková, ‘Foreign policy, international politics, and Con-structivism’, in Kubálková, Onuf and Kowert, International Relations in aConstructed World (see note 6), 33; Lapid and Kratochwil, The Return ofCulture and Identity in International Relations Theory.

21. Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory (Notre Dame, IN:University of Notre Dame Press, 1981), 6.

22. For another explanation of MacIntyre’s social theory and its relevance tointernational relations see also Thomas, The Global Resurgence of Religionand the Transformation of International Relations, 85–96., Thomas, ‘Livingcritically and “Living faithfully” in a global age’, 512.

23. MacIntyre, After Virtue, 11.24. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2005),

Rawls, Political Liberalism.25. MacIntyre, After Virtue, 181.26. Michael Walzer, Thick and Thin: A Moral Argument at Home and Abroad

(Notre Dame, IN.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994).27. Aristoteles, Nikomachische Ethik; Hans J. Morgenthau and Anthony

F. Lang, eds., Political Theory and International Affairs: Hans J. Morgenthauon Aristotle’s ‘The Politics’ (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2004).

28. Sean Molloy, ‘Hans J. Morgenthau versus E. H. Carr: Conflicting con-ceptions of ethics in Realism’, in Political Thought and InternationalRelations: Variations on a Realist Theme, ed. Duncan Bell (Oxford,New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 83–104, 94.

164 Notes

29. Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, 2nd ed. (NotreDame IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1984), 273.

30. MacIntyre, After Virtue, 186.31. Alasdair MacIntyre, Geschichte der Ethik im Überblick (Frankfurt a.M.: Hain,

1991), 20.32. Michael Walzer, Lokale Kritik – globale Standards: Zwei Formen moralischer

Auseinandersetzung (Hamburg: Rotbuch Verlag, 1996); MacIntyre, AfterVirtue; Amitai Etzioni, Die aktive Gesellschaft: Eine Theorie gesellschaftlicherund politischer Prozesse (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1975); AmitaiEtzioni, Die Entdeckung des Gemeinwesens: Ansprüche, Verantwortlichkeitenund das Programm des Kommunitarismus (Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel,1995); Amitai Etzioni, The Common Good (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2004).

33. Equally, as Toni Erskine puts it, ‘moral reasoning is necessarily embed-ded within particular memberships and practices . . . one’s own particularsocial identity and historical role necessarily define one’s “moral startingpoint”. To abstract from these would be to render oneself incapable ofethical deliberation.” Toni Erskine, ‘Qualifying cosmopolitanism? Solidar-ity, criticism, and Michael Walzer’s “View from the cave” ’, InternationalPolitics 44 (2007): 127.

34. Rawls, A Theory of Justice; Alasdair MacIntyre, Der Verlust der Tugend: Zurmoralischen Krise der Gegenwart (Frankfurt a.M. and New York: Suhrkamp,1995), 161–2.

35. Kevin Knight, The MacIntyre Reader (Notre Dame IN: University of NotreDame Press, 1998), 249.

36. MacIntyre, After Virtue, 222; Micah Lott, ‘Reasonably traditional: Self-contradiction and self-reference in Alasdair MacIntyre’s account oftradition-based rationality’, Journal of Religious Ethics 30, no. 3 (2002).

37. Walzer, Thick and Thin.38. Thomas A. Lewis, ‘On the limits of narrative: Communities in pluralistic

society’, Journal of Religion 86, no. 1 (2006): 56, 65–70; Gustavo Gutiérrez,Theologie der Befreiung (München: Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, 1973).

39. Sen, Identity and Violence.40. MacIntyre, Der Verlust der Tugend, 292–3.41. Mia Bloom, Dying to Kill: The Allure of Suicide Terror (New York: Columbia

University Press, 2007); Jerrold M. Post et al., ‘The psychology of suicideterrorism’, Psychiatry 72, no. 1 (Spring 2009).

42. Robert Anthony Pape, Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism(New York: Random House, 2005).

43. Scott Atran, ‘The moral logic and growth of suicide terrorism’, TheWashington Quarterly 29, no. 2 (Spring 2006): 130, 139.

44. Ibid., 131; 136.45. See, for example, Office of the Press Secretary of the White House,

‘President Addresses Nation, Discusses Iraq, War on Terror’, http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050628-7.html (accessed 22 May 2012).

46. Atran, ‘The moral logic and growth of suicide terrorism’, 137. See alsoJessica Stern, ‘Beneath bombast and bombs, a cauldron of humiliation’,Los Angeles Times, 6 June 2004.

Notes 165

47. Ron Hassner, ‘Fighting insurgencies on sacred ground’, The WashingtonQuarterly 29, no. 2 (Spring 2006); Ron E. Hassner, War on Sacred Grounds(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2009).

48. ‘[S]uicide terrorist today are not motivated exclusively or primarily byforeign occupation, they are not directed by a central organization, andthey are not nihilistic. Most suicide terrorist today are inspired by aglobal jihadism which, despite atavistic cultural elements, is thoroughlymodern movement filling the popular political void in Islamic com-munities left in the wake of discredited Western ideologies co-opted bycorrupt local governments.’ Atran, ‘The moral logic and growth of suicideterrorism’, 139.

49. Stanley Hauerwas, A Community of Character: Toward a ConstructiveChristian Social Ethic (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press,1981).

50. Jack Russel Weinstein, On MacIntyre (London: Wadsworth, 2003), 63.51. Kubálková, Onuf and Kowert, International Relations in a Constructed

World, xi.52. Kubálková, ‘Towards an international political theology’, 701.53. John L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words (Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press, 1975); Austin Searle, Sprechakte: Ein sprachphilosophis-cher Essay, 9th ed. (Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 2000); Bagge Lausten andWaever, ‘In defence of religion’, 719.

54. See also William E. Connolly, Pluralism (Durham, NC: Duke UniversityPress, 2005); Mark Wenman, ‘William E. Connolly: Pluralism withouttranscendence’, BJPIR 10 (2008); Mouffe, On the Political.

55. Onuf, World of Our Making; Nicholas G. Onuf, ‘Institutions, intentionsand international relations’, Review of International Studies 28, no. 2(2002).

56. Mario I. Aguilar, ‘Sacred rules and secular politics: Religion and rules’,International Relations 20, no. 3 (2006): 315, 316. See also Anthony Lang,Nicholas Rengger, and Wiliam Walker, ‘The role(s) of rules: Some con-ceptual clarifications’, International Relations 20, no. 3 (2006); AndreasOsiander, ‘Religion and politics in western civilization: The ancient worldas matrix and mirror of the modern!’, Millennium – Journal of InternationalStudies 29, no. 3 (2000).

57. Friedrich Willhelm Graf, Moses Vermächtnis: Über göttliche und menschlicheGesetze (München: C.H. Beck, 2006); Astrid Reuter, ‘Sekularität undReligionsfreiheit: Ein doppeltes Dillemma’, Leviathan 35, no. 2 (Juni2007).

58. Astrid B. Boening, ‘Euro-Islam: A Constructivist idea or a concept ofthe English School?’, EUMA 4, no. 12 (May 2007): 4. See also BassamTibi, Kreuzzug und Djihad (MünchenI: Bertelsmann Verlag, 1999); BassamTibi, Islam between Culture and Politics, 2nd ed. (New York: PalgraveMacmillan, 2005).

59. See, for example, Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming ofGlobal Christianity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Thomas,‘A globalized God’.

166 Notes

60. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations, particularly chapter 5.61. For a similar, although not a Constructivist attempt, see Eric O. Hanson,

Religion and Politics in the International System Today (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2006).

62. She is therefore making a similar distinction to the one made by EnglishSchool scholar Martin Wight in his seminal piece ‘Why is there no inter-national theory?’ some 40 years earlier. Also, Wight assumed a ratherharsh distinction between the domestic and the international realm interms of politics. Martin Wight, ‘Why is there no international theory?’,in Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the Theory of International Politics, ed.Herbert Butterfield and Martin Wight (London: Allen and Unwin, 1966),17–34.

63. Toft, Philpott and Shah, God’s Century.64. Peter L. Berger, The Heretical Imperative: Contemporary Possibilities of Reli-

gious Affirmation (New York: Doubleday, 1979).

5 The English School: Modes of Society

1. Patrick James, International Relations and Scientific Progress: Structural Real-ism Reconsidered (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2002); BalkanDevlen, Patrick James, and Özgür Özdamar, ‘The English School, inter-national relations, and progress’, International Studies Review 7 (June2005).

2. The most comprehensive approach for bringing ‘in’ the English Schoolregarding the problem of international relations theories and religionis undertaken by Scott Thomas (Thomas, The Global Resurgence of Reli-gion and the Transformation of International Relations). But, as the chaptershows, there is ample space and need to expand this approach, as wellas the possibility of thinking differently about the English School andreligion. The so called English School is far more than only an ‘English’School. There are genuine and ‘first-generation’ English School scholarsall over the world, for example the Australian Hedley Bull. Moreover,there are many scholars who use terms and approaches of the EnglishSchool (i.e. international society) and do not belong to the English Schoolin a narrow sense. David R. Mapel and Terry Nardin, eds., InternationalSociety: Diverse Ethical Perspectives (Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress, 1998); World Society Research Group, ‘Introduction: World soci-ety’, in Civilizing World Politics: Society and Community Byond the State, ed.Mathias Albert, Lothar Brock and Klaus D. Wolf (Frankfurt a.M.: Rowmanand Littlefield, 2000), 1–17; Terry Nardin, Law, Morality and the Relationsof States (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1983). Ironically, thefirst mention of the term ‘English School’ was brought forward in anattempt to argue for a ‘case for closure’ by Roy Jones in a 1981 arti-cle. Roy E. Jones, ‘The English School of international relations: A casefor closure’, Review of International Studies 7, no. 1 (1981). For compre-hensive introductions to the English School theory see Andrew Linklater

Notes 167

and Hidemi Suganami, The English School of International Relations: A Con-temporary Reassessment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006);Tim Dunne, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School(Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1998). Richard Little noted that the question of‘who is in and who is out’ of the English School ‘circle’ is not an issueworth spending time on. Richard Little, ‘The English School vs. AmericanRealism’, Review of International Studies 29, no. 3 (2003): 444.

3. Ian Hall, ‘History, Christianity and diplomacy: Sir Herbert Butterfield andinternational relations’, Review of International Studies 28 (2002); ScottM. Thomas, ‘Faith, history and Martin Wight: The role of religion inthe historical sociology of the English School of international relations’,International Affairs 77, no. 4 (2001); Renée Jeffery, ‘Australian Realismand international relations: John Anderson and Hedley Bull on ethics,religion and society’, International Politics 45 (2008).

4. Williams, ‘Hedley Bull and Just War‘; Hall, The International Thought ofMartin Wight, 31, 150.

5. Christian Reus-Smit, ‘Imagining society: Constructivism and the EnglishSchool’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations 4, no. 3 (Octo-ber 2002). The following thoughts are well aware of the fact (and evenscientific danger) that the English School is used nowadays to subsumenearly everything under its ‘banner’. Jörg Friedrichs, European Approachesto International Relation Theory: A House with Many Mansions (London:Routledge, 2004), 102.

6. Martin Wight, International Theory: The Three Traditions (Leicester:Leicester University Press, 1991).

7. Williams, The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations.8. Martin Wight, edited by Hedlkey Bull, Systems of States (Leicester: Leicester

University Press, 1997).9. Ferdinand Tönnis, edited by Jose Harris, translated by Jose Harris and

Margaret Hollis, Community and Civil Society (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2001).

10. Bull, The Anarchical Society.11. Sean Molloy, ‘The Realist logic of international society’, Cooperation and

Conflict 38 (June 2003).12. Hedley Bull and Adam Watson, The Expansion of International Society

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984), 1.13. Maurice Keens-Soper, Europe in the World: The Persistence of Power Politics

(Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1998).14. Linklater and Suganami, The English School of International Relations, 155.15. Robert Jackson, ‘Pluralism in international political theory’, Review of

International Studies 18 (April 1992): 271.16. This is in accordance with the general ‘British’ notion of international

relation theory of ‘doing’ international relations (in contrast to the socialscience dominance in the USA). Friedrichs, European Approaches to Interna-tional Relations Theory, 91. See also John Williams, ‘Pluralism, solidarismand the emergence of world society in English School theory’, Inter-national Relations 19, no. 1 (2005): 25; Adam Watson, The Evolution of

168 Notes

International Society: A Comparative Historical Analysis (London: Routledge,1992); Bull and Watson, The Expansion of International Society.

17. Timothy Garton Ash, ‘Davos man’s death wish’, The Guardian, February 3,2005, http://www.guardian.co.uk /world /2005/feb/03/globalisation.comment (accessed 23 May 2012). See also Samuel P. Huntington, ‘Deadsouls: The denationalization of the American elite’, The National Interest,Spring 2004.

18. International society (the Grotian/Rationalism tradition) mainly ‘is aboutthe institutionalisation of shared interest and identity amongst states,and puts the creation and maintenance of shared norms, rules andinstitutions at the centre of IR theory. This position has some parallelsto regime theory, but is much deeper, having constitutive rather thanmerely instrumental implications . . . International society has been themain focus of English school thinking, and the concept is quite welldeveloped and relatively clear. In parallel with international system, itis also based on an ontology of states, but is generally approached withconstructivist epistemology and historical methods.’ Barry Buzan, FromInternational to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structureof Globalisation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 7. Seealso Clair A. Cutler, ‘The ‘Grotian tradition’ in international relations’,Review of International Studies 17, no. 1 (1991).

19. Bull, The Anarchical Society, 269.20. R. J. Vincent, Human Rights and International Relations: Issues and Responses

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 151.21. R. J. Vincent, ‘Western conceptions of a universal moral order’, British

Journal of International Studies 4, no. 1 (1978): 28.22. James Mayall, World Politics: Progress and its Limits (Cambridge: Polity,

2000), 14; Buzan, From International to World Society?, 47.23. The pluralist notion, on the other hand, offers a possibility for the analyt-

ical tool of world society as Linklater sets out: ‘A pluralist society of statesis concerned with reducing inter-state harm and incorporates “interna-tional harm conventions” within its institutional framework, whereasa solidarist society of states incorporates “cosmopolitan harm conven-tions”, designed to reduce harm done to individual citizens located inseparate communities. “International good citizens” are states, or gov-ernments acting for the states, who act to protect the respective socialgoals of the pluralist, solidarist and other interrelations.’ Linklater andSuganami, The English School of International Relations, 8.

24. Molly Cochran, ‘Charting the ethics of the English School: What ‘good’is there in a middle-ground ethics?’, International Studies Quarterly 53(2009): 222; Joao Almeida, ‘Hedley Bull, “Embedded Cosmopolitanism”,and the Pluralist-Solidarist Debate’, in The Anarchical Society in a Global-ized World, ed. Richard Little and John Williams (Basingstoke: PalgraveMacmillan, 2006); William Bain, ‘One order, two laws: Recovering the‘normative’ in English School theory’, Review of International Studies 33,no. 4 (2007): 574.

Notes 169

25. C. T. McIntyre, Herbert Butterfield: Historian as Dissenter (New Haven, CT:Yale University Press, 2004), 301.

26. Reus-Smit, ‘Imagining society’, 499.27. Wendt, ‘Anarchy is what states make of it’, Alexander Wendt, Social

Theory of International Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1999); Hidemi Suganami, ‘Alexander Wendt and the English School’, Jour-nal of International Relations and Development 4, no. 4 (December 2001);Reus-Smit, ‘Imagining Society’, 488. However, the so-called Miami Group(which does not represent mainstream, still rather positivist Construc-tivism) appreciates this very relationship in its theoretical framework.Vendulka Kubálková, ‘Introduction’, in Foreign Policy in a ConstructedWorld, ed. Vendulka Kubálková (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 2001), 3–11, 3.

28. Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, 247–50.29. MacIntyre, After Virtue.30. Chris Brown, ‘International theory and international society: The viabil-

ity of the middle way’, Review of International Studies 21, no. 2 (1995):186.

31. Buzan, From International to World Society?, 23. Although some scholarsclaim that, at least methodologically, ‘there is little or no consensus’regarding this outline. Ian Hall, ‘Still the English Patient? Closures andinventions in the English School’, International Affairs 77, no. 2 (2001):942.

32. See, for example, Laust Schouenborg, ‘A new institutionalism? TheEnglish School as international sociological theory’, International Relations25, no. 1 (2011). For a rather willful expansion of the English Schooltoward culture see Barry Buzan’s 2010 Martin Wight Memorial Lecture:Barry Buzan, ‘Culture and international society’, International Affairs 86,no. 1 (2010).

33. Buzan, From International to World Society?, 39.34. Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics

(London: Macmillan, 1977), 279.35. Buzan, From International to World Society?, 161–204, 184, 187.36. Ibid., 198–9.37. Scott M. Thomas, ‘Building communities of character: Foreign aid

policy and faith-based organizations’, SAIS Review XXIV, no. 2 (Sum-mer/Fall 2004): 133. See also Scott M. Thomas, ‘Religious resurgence,postmodernism, and world politics’, in Religion and Global Order, ed. JohnL. a. M. W. Esposito (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2000), 38–65.

38. Buzan, From International to World Society?, 251.39. Ibid., 257.40. ‘This declared state of exception mirrors the ambiguous nature of

Schmitt’s, where the sovereign and his actions define a border that isneither within nor without the constitutional order.’ Andrew Norris,“Us” and “Them”: The politics of American self-assertion after 9/11’,Metaphilosophy 35, no. 3 (2004): 266. See also the notion of MichaelWalzer concerning the state of (supreme) emergency (ethics): ‘Thestrongest argument against supreme emergency is that it makes a fetish

170 Notes

of the political community. Not . . . of the state: the state is nothing morethan an instrument of the community, a particular structure for organiz-ing collective action that can always be replaced by some other structure.The political community (the community of faith too) can’t be simi-larly replaced.’ Michael Walzer, Arguing about War (New Haven CT: YaleUniversity Press, 2005), 49. ‘[T]he Bush administration echoes Schmitt’s“borderline concept” of sovereignty. To some extent this is a matter ofthe administration’s taking advantage of weaknesses and lapses in theU.S. Constitution, which does not establish a well worked out institu-tional framework for identifying and addressing states of emergency andconstituting a commissarial as opposed to sovereign dictator to meet it.’Norris, ‘ “Us” and “Them” ’, 265.

41. Thomas, The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation ofInternational Relations, 152.

42. Keens-Soper, Europe in the World; Cochran, ‘Charting the ethics of theEnglish School’, 222.

43. Barry Buzan, ‘An English School perspective on “What kind of worldorder?” ’, Cooperation and Conflict 41, no. 4 (2006): 366–7.

44. Waltz, Theory of International Politics.45. ‘Despite the fact that many constructivists situate their work within the

broad church of critical international theory . . . a hallmark of which is astrong commitment to combining sociological, normative and praxeo-logical inquiry . . . and despite the clear cosmopolitanism that motivatesmuch constructivist work, little if any attempt has been made to recog-nise or engage with the normative aspects of English School theory.’Reus-Smit, ‘Imagining Society’, 490. See also Buzan, ‘An English Schoolperspective on “What kind of world order?” ’; Bull, The Anarchical Soci-ety; R. J. Vincent, Non-intervention and International Order (Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press, 1974); Vincent, Human Rights and InternationalRelations; Jackson, The Global Covenant; Mayall, World Politics; NicholasWheeler, Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).

46. Reus-Smit, ‘Imagining society’, 490; Andrew Linklater, The Transforma-tion of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era(Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998); Richard Price and Christian Reus-Smit,‘Dangerous liaisons? Critical international theory and Constructivism’,European Journal of International Relations 4, no. 3 (1998).

47. Paul Sharp and Geoffrey Wiseman, eds., The Diplomatic Corps as anInstitution of International Society (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).

48. ‘The need for cosmopolitan thinking has never been greater, and it mayyet come to shape political theory and practice to an unprecedentedextent.’ Andrew Linklater, ‘Distant suffering and cosmopolitan obliga-tions’, International Politics 44 (2007): 19; William Smith, ‘Anticipatinga cosmopolitan future: The case of humanitarian military intervention’,International Politics 44 (2007). For a comprehensive critique on thecosmopolitan approaches see especially Mouffe, On the Political.

Notes 171

49. Thomas W. Pogge offers a comprehensive definition of cosmopoli-tanism. He identifies three characteristics of all styles of cosmopolitanism:(1) ‘individualism’: individuals are accorded the status of ‘ultimateunits of [moral] concern’; (2) ‘universality’: this (status) applies equallyto all human beings; and (3) ‘generality’: this (status) carries ‘global[moral] force’. Thomas W. Pogge, ‘Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty’,in Political Reconstructing in Europe: Ethical Perspectives, ed. Chris Brown(London: Routledge, 1994), 89–122, 89–90. See also Caroline Walsh,‘Rawls and Walzer on non-domestic justice’, Contemporary Political Theory6 (2007): 423–4.

50. ‘Cosmopolitanism originates from the Stoics and calls for a primary alle-giance to the worldwide community of human beings. Taking humanityitself as the primary source of value, cosmopolitans insist on the unityof the human species and aspire to foster a global community.’ SibaN. Grovogui, ‘The new cosmopolitanisms: Subtexts, pretexts and contextof ethics’, International Relations 19, no. 1 (2005): 103. See also PhengCheah and Bruce Robbins, Cosmopolitics: Thinking and Feeling Beyond theNation (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998).

51. Keck and Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders, 2; Magaret E. Keck and KathrynSikkink, ‘Transnational advocacy networks in international politics: Intro-duction’, in Essential Readings in World Politics, ed. Karen A. Mingst andJack L. Snyder, 2nd ed. (New York: Norton, 2004), 222–33.

52. Reus-Smit, ‘Imagining society’, 500; Haynes, An Introduction to Interna-tional Relations and Religion, 31–62.

53. Most of them, however, follow a rather secular agenda. See, for exam-ple, John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, The Israel Lobby and U.S.Foreign Policy (New York: Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2008).

54. Jonathan Fox and Shmuel Sandler, Bringing Religion into InternationalRelations (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), 168–9.

55. Andrew Linklater, ‘Cosmopolitan political communities in internationalrelations’, International Relations 16, no. 1 (2002): 138. Indeed, one ofthe main points of critic which illustrates the limits of the cosmopoli-tanism ideal is that they are still too much focused on the state. The othertwo limits are the Europe-centric approach and the specific teleology ofcosmopolitanism theory which suggests to lead like a ‘plan’ towards uni-versalization. Nick Vaughan-Williams, ‘Beyond a cosmopolitan ideal: Thepolitics of singularity’, International Politics 44 (2007): 112–15.

56. Erskine, ‘Qualifying cosmopolitanism?’, 129.57. MacIntyre, After Virtue.58. Linklater, ‘Cosmopolitan political communities in international rela-

tions’, 136. Solidarists tend to believe that a certain degree of cosmopoli-tanism is necessary for international society. Linklater argues that, ‘[a]nelementary universalism underpins the society of states and contributesto the survival of international order’. Linklater, The Transformation ofPolitical Community, 24.

59. Not to speak of the New Testament. Important texts in the Old Testamentregarding the love towards strangers are, for example, Leviticus 19: 34 andDeuteronomy 10: 17–19.

172 Notes

60. Linklater, ‘Distant suffering and cosmopolitan obligations’, 33.61. Williams, ‘Pluralism, solidarism and the emergence of world society in

English School theory’, 20.62. Ibid., 23.63. As Carl Schmitt notes, ‘wars to end all wars’ are the most brutal ones. Carl

Schmitt, Der Begriff des Politischen, 2nd ed. (Berlin: Duncker and Humbolt,2002), Text von 1932 mit einem Vorwort und drei Corollarien, 5. See alsoWolfgang Palaver, ‘Carl Schmitt’s ‘apocalyptic’ resistance against globalcivil war’, in Politics and Apocalypse, ed. Robert Hamerton-Kelley (MorillHall: Michigan State University Press, 2007), 69–94.

64. Tim Dunne, ‘The English School’, in International Relation Theories:Discipline and Diversity, ed. Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki and Steven Smith(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 127–47, 141.

65. Susann H. Rudolph, ‘Introduction: Religion, states, and transnationalcivil society’, in Transnational Religion and Fading States, ed. SusannH. Rudolph (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997), 1–24, 2.

66. Susann H. Rudolph, ‘Dehomogenizing religious formations’, inTransnational Religion and Fading States, ed. Susann H. Rudolph (Boulder,CO: Westview Press, 1997), 243–61, 257. World society, as Williams putsit, ‘is something of which we need to be suspicious because of the risksthat its pursuit may create for the painfully built-up and relatively fragilestructures of order that exist among states. The weakening of the non-intervention principle in pursuit of cosmopolitan normative goals, suchas the protection and promotion of human rights and democracy, risksconflict with states where such ideas are not accepted, or possibly evenrecognised and fully understood. The conservative needs of order shouldbe placed above the pursuit of justice should that pursuit conflict withthe core tenets of international society.’ Williams, ‘Pluralism, solidarismand the emergence of world society in English School theory’, 23.

67. David L. Blaney and Naeem Inayatullah, ‘The Westphalian deferral’,International Studies Review 2, no. 2 (2002).

68. Williams, ‘Pluralism, solidarism and the emergence of world society inEnglish School theory’, 22.

69. ‘[W]e are all the same, that is human, in such a way that nobody is everthe same as anyone else who ever lived, lives or will live.’ Hannah Arendt,The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958), 8;Jackson, The Global Covenant.

70. Scheuerman, The Realist Case for Global Reform, 100.71. Molloy, ‘The Realist logic of international society’. It is also the case,

therefore, that some research within the context of the English Schooltries to culminate (structural) Realism in terms of Kenneth Waltz with‘softer’ approaches like regime theory. Barry Buzan and Richard Little,International Systems in World History: Remaking the Study of InternationalRelations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).

72. For one of the rather rare attempts to outline the methodological poten-tial of the English School see Cornelia Navari, ed., Theorising InternationalSociety: English School Methods (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009).

Notes 173

73. Bull and Watson, The Expansion of International Society; Watson, TheEvolution of International Society.

74. More recent and not particularly well known evidence for this thesis is theSathya Sai Baba global civil religious movement, founded in the 1960s bythe Indian guru Sathya Sai Baba. Tulasi Srinivas, Winged Faith: Rethink-ing Globalization and Religious Pluralism through the Sathya Sai Movement(New York: Columbia University Press, 2010).

75. Paul Sharp, Diplomatic Theory of International Relations (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2009), 262–3.

76. Agnew, ‘Deus vult’, 46.77. Williams, ‘Pluralism, solidarism and the emergence of world society in

English School theory’, 22.78. Wight, International Theory, 1.79. Bull, The Anarchical Society, 254–66.80. Herbert Butterfield, Christianity and History (New York: Charles Scribner’s

Sons, 1950).

6 Realism: overcoming evil

1. Seán Molloy, The Hidden History of Realism: A Genealogy of Power Politics(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006).

2. Toft, Philpott and Shah, God’s Century, 74.3. In his seminal biographical study Christoph Frei points out the prime

influence of the rather anti religious Nietzsche. Christoph Frei, HansJ. Morgenthau: An Intellectual Biography (Baton Rouge: Louisiana StateUniversity Press, 2001).

4. Ronald H. Stone, Christian Realism and Peacemaking: Issues in U.S. ForeignPolicy (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1988), 43. It therefore may be nocoincidence that the German translation of Politics among Nations wasentitled Macht und Frieden (‘power and peace’).

5. Gustav Aulen, Dag Hammarskjöld’s White Book: An Analysis of Markings(London: SPCK, 1970), 95.

6. John C. Bennett, Christian Realism (New York: Scribner, 1952), 180–2.7. Reinhold Niehbur, Christian Realism and Political Problems (New York:

Scribner, 1953); Reinhold Niehbur, Moral Man and Immoral Society(New York: Continuum, 2005); Reinhold Niehbur, The Children of Lightand the Children of Darkness: A Vindication of Democracy and a Critique ofits Traditional Defense (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1944).

8. Reinhold Niehbur, Christian Realism and Political Problems (Fairfield,NJ: Augustus M. Kelley Publishers, 1977), 119–46. Niebuhr describesSt Augustine as the ‘first great realist in western history’ (ibid. 120–121)and from whom he took the assumption that ‘self-love is the source ofevil’ (ibid. 122). See also Kennan, Around the Cragged Hill. Kennan char-acterizes humans as ‘cracked vessels’ (ibid. 17–36) who are ‘doomed tomediate between our animal nature and almost divine inspiration toescape the contingence of human limitations’. Martin Griffiths, Fifty Key

174 Notes

Thinkers in International Relations (London: Routledge, 1999), 24. See alsoGeorge F. Kennan, ‘Foreign policy and Christian conscience’, The AtlanticMonthly, no. 5 (May 1959).

9. Cortright, Peace, 204.10. Niebuhr, Christianity and Power Politics, 14.11. It is, therefore, not that way, as Stanley Hauerwas assumes, that Niebuhr

introduced, in a similar manner to Carl Schmitt, a distinction betweentwo moralities, private and public. Being Christian automatically meansto transcend the borders between any such distinctions. See, for example,Ronald H. Stone, Prophetic Realism: Beyond Militarism and Pacifism in anAge of Terror (New York: T and T Clark, 2005), 125–6. That is a privateproblem Martin Wight also struggled with. Hall, The International Thoughtof Martin Wight, 21–42.

12. Terry Nardin, ‘Ethical traditions’, in Traditions of International Ethics, ed.Terry Nardin and David R. Mapel (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1992), 1–22, 1.

13. Augustine, The City of God (New York: Modern Library, 1994), Translatedby Marcus Dods with an introduction by Thomas Merton.

14. Cecelia Lynch, ‘Acting on belief: Christian perspectives on suffering andviolence’, Ethics and International Affairs 14, no. 1 (2000): 87.

15. James Schall, At the Limits of Political Philosophy: From ‘Brilliant Errors’to Things of Uncommon Importance (Washington, DC: The Catholic Uni-versity of America Press, 1996), 80. Hope therefore is a genuine reli-gious term.

16. John Paul and John-Peter Pham, Centesimus Annus: Assessment and Per-spectives for the Future Catholic Social Doctrine: Proceedings of the Interna-tional Congress on the Fifth Anniversary of the Promulgation of the EncyclicalLetter Centesimus Annus, Rome, April 29-30, 1997 (Città del Vaticano:Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1998), para. 25.

17. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations; Raymond Aron, Peace and War:A Theory of International Relations (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1966).See also Murielle Cozette, ‘What lies ahead: Classical Realism on thefuture of international relations’, International Studies Review 10 (2008);Scheuerman, ‘The (classical) Realist vision of global reform’; Scheuerman,The Realist Case for Global Reform.

18. John Paul and Pham, Centesimus Annus, para. 25.19. Niehbur, The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness, 181; John

D. Carlson, ‘The morality, politics, and irony of war: Recovering ReinholdNiebuhr’s ethical Realism’, Journal of Religious Ethics 36, no. 4 (2008):623–4.

20. Anatol Lieven and John Hulsman, Ethical Realism: A Vision for America’sRole in the World (New York: Pantheon Books, 2006), 56.

21. Ibid., 66–83.22. Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and

Peace, 5th ed. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978), 105.23. Ross, Statecraft, 141–2.24. Max Weber, Politik als Beruf (Stuttgart: Reclam, 2004).

Notes 175

25. Piki Ish-Shalom, ‘The triptych of Realism, Elitism, and Conservatism’,International Studies Review 8 (2006).

26. MacIntyre, Der Verlust der Tugend, 337–9.27. Mervyn Frost, ‘Tragedy, ethics and international relations’, International

Relations 17, no. 4 (2003): 490–1.28. Thomas, ‘A globalized God’.29. Zakaria, The Post-American World, 35.30. 2 Thessalonians 2: 6–7: ‘You know what it is that is now holding him

back, so that he will be revealed when his time comes. For the secret ofthis lawlessness is already at work, but only until the person now holdingit back gets out of the way.’ The katéchon is not the Son of Perdition or theSon of Sin. 2 Thessalonians 2: 3: ‘Let no man deceive you by any means:for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, andthat man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.’ John 17: 12: ‘WhileI was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thougavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition;that the scripture might be fulfilled.’

31. Reinhold Niebuhr, ‘Why the Christian Church is not pacifist’,in TheEssential Reinhold Niebuhr: Selected Essays and Addresses, ed. RobertM. Brown (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1986), 102–19, 113.

32. Karl O. Hondrich, ‘Auf dem Weg zu einer Weltgewaltordnung’, NeueZürcher Zeitung, March 22, 2003, http://www.uni-muenster.de/PeaCon/global-texte/g-w/n/NZZ-hondrichswelt.htm (accessed 23 May 2012).

33. Felix Grossheutschi, Carl Schmitt und die Lehre vom Katéchon (Berlin:Duncker and Humblot, 1996); Wolfgang Palaver, ‘Order out of chaos inthe theories of Carl Schmitt and René Girard’, Synthesis 1, no. 1 (Spring1995): 101–4.

34. Palaver, ‘Hobbes and the Katéchon’, 68.35. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, edited by E. Bethge, translated by Neville Horton

Smith, Ethics (New York: Touchstone, 1995), 108.36. Murray, ‘The moral politics of Hans Morgenthau’, Maurizio Viroli,

‘Machiavelli’s Realism’, Constellations 14, no. 4 (2007): 478.37. Hans J. Morgenthau, ‘The future of diplomacy’, in International Poli-

tics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, ed. Robert J. Art and RobertJervis, 4th ed. (New York: Harper Collins College Publ., 1996), 7–16, 13.

38. Hans J. Morgenthau, ‘The evil of politics and the ethics of evil’, Ethics 56,no. 1 (October 1945): 18; 17.

39. Ibid., 13.40. Ibid.41. Robert W. Lovin, Reinhold Niebuhr and Christian Realism (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1995), 4.42. Alexander F. C. Webster and Darrell Cole, The Virtue of War: Reclaiming the

Classic Christian Traditions East and West (Salisbury, MA: Regina OrthodoxPress, 2004), 122–3. See also John Finnis Finnis, Joseph M. Boyle, Jr andGermain Grisez, Nuclear Deterrence, Morality and Realism (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1987).

176 Notes

43. James F. Childress, ‘Just-War theories: The bases, interrelations, priori-ties, and functions of their criteria’, Theological Studies 39 (1978); JamesT. Johnson, ‘The idea of defense in historical and contemporary thinkingabout Just War’, Journal of Religious Ethics 36, no. 4 (2008).

44. Warren Smith, ‘Augustine and the limits of preemptive and preventivewar’, Journal of Religious Ethics 35, no. 1 (2007): 159–60.

45. Draper, ‘The Christian and war’.46. Schmitt, Politische Theologie.47. This is obvious if one considers that Realists have always been among

the most robust critics of neoconservative foreign policy (particu-larly concerning the war in Iraq 2003) but also of more liberalattempts of a militarized foreign policy approach. John J. Mearsheimer,‘Hans J. Morgenthau and the Iraq War: Realists versus neo-conservatives’, www.opendemocracy.net, http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy-americanpower/morgenthau_2522.jsp (accessed 23 May2012); John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, ‘An unnecessary war’,Foreign Policy, no. 134 (January/February 2003); Michael C. Williams,‘Morgenthau now: Neoconservatism, national greatness, and Realism’, inRealism Reconsidered: The Legacy of Hans Morgenthau in International Rela-tions, ed. Michael C. Williams (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007),216–40.

48. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, 8.49. See, for example, Thomas, ‘Living critically and “Living faithfully” in a

global age’, 519–20.50. Ben Mollov, Ephraim Meir, and Chaim Lavie, ‘An integrated strategy for

peacebuilding: Judaic approaches’, Die Friedenswarte. Journal of Interna-tional Peace and Organization 82, 2–3 (2007): 139. Also Michel Foucaultacknowledges, next to the imperative of self governance, the impera-tive of ‘speaking truth’ (to power) as the two main imperatives left bythe ancient world and Christianity. St Augustine consequently remarkedthat civil religion cannot escape these two imperatives. Rolf Schieder,‘Zivilreligionen als Friedensstifter?’, in Friedensstiftende Religionen? Reli-gion und die Deeskalation politischer Konflikte, ed. Manfred Brocker andMathias Hildebrandt (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften,2008), 123–37, 136; Jeremy R. Carrette, Foucault and Religion: SpiritualCorporality and Political Spirituality (London: Routledge, 2000). For the dis-tinct approach of Judaism of ‘speaking truth to power’ see, for example,Ira Rifkin, Spiritual Perspectives on Globalization: Making sense of Economicand Cultural Upheaval, 2nd ed. (Woodstock Vt.: Skylight Paths Pub.,2004), 78–96. In a conversation in 2011 with the author, Gottfried KarlKindermann, a research assistant to Hans Morgenthau in the early 1950s,reported that Morgenthau mentioned to him that he had plans to writea book on the political realism of the Hebrew Prophets of the OldTestament.

51. Mollov, Meir and Lavie, ‘An integrated strategy for peacebuilding’, 140;Ben Mollov, Power and Transcendence: Hans J. Morgenthau and the JewishExperience (Lanham, MD: Lexington, 2002), 102–8. That Mollov is able

Notes 177

to avoid mentioning the name and influence of Carl Schmitt regardingMorgenthau is another story. Be that as it may, it certainly teaches us thatMorgenthau is a figure whose text can rather easily be interpreted in abiased way for one’s own scientific sake.

52. Morgenthau, Truth and Power. Regarding Morgenthau’s opposition to thewar in Vietnam see, for example, Lorenzo Zambernardi, ‘The impotenceof power: Morgenthau’s critique of American intervention in Vietnam’,Review of International Studies 37, no. 3 (2011). For Morgenthau’s andRealism’s stance regarding war in general see Bruce Kuklick, Blind Ora-cles: Intellectuals and War from Kennan to Kissinger, 3rd printing, and 1stpaperback printing, 72–94.

53. The edition of Truth and Power is dedicated to the legal positivist scholarHans Kelsen with the words ‘who has taught us through his example howto speak Truth to Power’. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, v.

54. Douglas Klusmeyer, ‘Beyond tragedy: Hannah Arendt and HansMorgenthau on responsibility, evil and political ethics’, International Stud-ies Review 11 (2009): 341. Hannah Arendt, on the other hand, saw themas a proper (legal) undertaking that will do justice (ibid.).

55. Bull, The Anarchical Society.56. Nicolas Guilhot, ed., The Invention of International Relations Theory:

Realism, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory(New York: Columbia University Press, 2011).

57. Guilhot, ‘American Katechon’, 227; Guilhot, The Invention of InternationalRelations Theory.

58. Kenneth W. Thompson, Christian Ethics and the Dilemmas of Foreign Policy(Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1959).

59. Jones, ‘Christian Realism and the foundations of the English School’, 372.60. Alberto R. Coll, The Wisdom of Statecraft: Sir Herbert Butterfield and the Phi-

losophy of International Politics (Durham: Duke University Press, 1985),149. See also Keith C. Sewell, Herbert Butterfield and the Interpretation ofHistory (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005).

61. Coll, The Wisdom of Statecraft, 149.62. Butterfield, Christianity, Diplomacy and War, 3.63. Thomas, ‘Faith, history and Martin Wight’; Martin Nicholson, ‘The

enigma of Martin Wight’, Review of International Studies 7 (1981): 17.64. Martin Wight, ‘Christian pacifism’, Theology 33, no. 193 (July 1936): 13.

See also Sean Molloy, ‘Bridging Realism and Christianity in the inter-national thought of Martin Wight’ (University of Kent at Canterbury,8 September 2001).

65. Hall, The International Thought of Martin Wight, 148–9.66. John Paul VI, Pacem in Terris (Vatican, 1963), http://www.vatican.va/holy_

father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_11041963_pacem_en.html (accessed 23 May 2012).

67. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, 283–91.68. Lieven, Ethical Realism, 64.69. Normunds Kamergrauzis, The Persistence of Christian Realism: A Study of

the Social Ethics of Ronald H. Preston (Uppsala: Uppsala University Press,2001), 248–9.

178 Notes

70. Butterfield, Christianity, Diplomacy and War, 12.71. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, 517.72. Richard Ned Lebow, The Tragic Vision of Politics: Ethics, Interests and Orders

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).73. Williams, The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations, 186.74. Murray, ‘The Moral Politics of Hans Morgenthau’, 106.75. Lovin, Reinhold Niebuhr and Christian Realism, 5.76. Robert W. Lovin, Christian Ethics: An Essential Guide (Nashville, TN:

Abingdon Press, 2000), 78.77. For the theme of ‘collective violence’ see particularly the approach of

Charles Tilly. Charles Tilly, Collective Violence (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2003).

78. Dennis P. McCann, ‘Hermeneutics and ethics: The example of ReinholdNiebuhr’, Journal of Religious Ethics 8, no. 1 (1980): 27, 35.

79. Stone, Prophetic Realism.80. Scheuerman, ‘Was Morgenthau a Realist?’, 517.81. Joshua Muravchik and Stephen M. Walt, ‘The neocons vs. the Real-

ists’, The National Interest, 9 March 2008, http://nationalinterest.org/greatdebate/neocons-realists-3802 (accessed 23 May 2012); BrentScowcroft, ‘Don’t attack Saddam’, Wall Street Journal, August 15, 2002;Mearsheimer and Walt, ‘An unnecessary war’.

82. Murray, ‘The moral politics of Hans Morgenthau’, 106.83. Schmitt, ‘The age of neutralizations and depoliticizations’, Axtmann,

‘Humanity or enmity¿; see also Mouffe, On the Political.84. Mark Edwards, ‘ “God has chosen us”: Re-membering Christian Realism,

rescuing Christendom, and the contest of responsibilities during the ColdWar’, Diplomatic History 33, no. 1 (January 2009): 93; Ian Clark, Legitimacyin International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).

85. Gary J. Dorrien, Social Ethics in the Making: Interpreting an AmericanTradition (Chichester UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009), 266.

7 Another notion of religion in world politics

1. Berger, ‘Secularization falsified’.2. Jackson, ‘Pluralism in international political theory’, 274.3. George Crowder, ‘Pluralism and liberalism’, Political Studies Review 42

(1994): 303.4. Jackson, The Global Covenant, 339.5. Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality

(New York: Basic Books, 1983), 29–30.6. Schmitt, ‘The age of neutralizations and depoliticizations’. In the case

of Morgenthau, who relied in his work on Carl Schmitt, it is, how-ever, true that he was influenced by leftist thinkers as well. WilliamE. Scheuerman, ‘Realism and the left: The case of Hans J. Morgenthau’,Review of International Studies 34 (2008).

Notes 179

7. Benjamin R. Barber, ‘Ein Krieg “jeder gegen jeden”: Terror und die Politikder Angst’, Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, no. 18 (2002); Benjamin R. Bar-ber, Jihad vs. McWorld: Jihad versus McWorld (New York: Times Books,1995).

8. Jürgen Manemann, ‘Monotheismus und Demokratie: EineStandortbestimmung’, in Westliche Moderne, Christentum und Islam. Gewaltals Anfrage an monotheistische Religionen, ed. Wolfgang Palaver, RomanSiebenrock and Dietmar Regensburger (Innsbruck: Innsbruck UniversityPress, 2008), 59–76.

9. Charles Frankel, Morality and U.S. Foreign Policy (New York: Foreign PolicyAssociation, 1975), 52.

10. George Crowder, Isaiah Berlin: Liberty and Pluralism (Cambridge: Polity,2004), 121–2. See also Walzer, Thick and Thin.

11. José Casanova, ‘Balancing religious freedom and cultural preservation’,The Review of Faith and International Affairs 6, no. 2 (Summer 2008);Thomas F. Farr, World of Faith and Freedom: Why International Religious Lib-erty is Vital to American National Security (Oxford: Oxford University Press,2008); Grim and Finke, The Price of Freedom Denied.

12. Brian Cox and Daniel Philpott, ‘Faith-based diplomacy: An ancient ideanewly emergent’, The Brandywine Review of Faith and International Affairs1, no. 2 (Fall 2003).

13. James Kurth, ‘The Vatican’s foreign policy’, The National Interest, no. 32(Summer 1993): 41.

14. Drew Christiansen, ‘Catholic peacemaking: From Pacem in Terris toCentesimus Annus’, A Talk prepared for The United States Instituteof Peace, http://www.restorativejustice.org/10fulltext/christiansen/view(accessed 23 May 2012).

15. Daniel Philpott, ‘The Catholic wave’, Journal of Democracy 15, no. 2(2004).

16. John Paul VI, Pacem in Terris, para 80.17. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, 283–91.18. Paul Sharp, ‘Herbert Butterfield, the English School and the civilizing

virtues of diplomacy’, International Affairs 9, no. 4 (2003): 877.19. Johannes Paul II, ‘Sollicitudo rei socialis’. http://www.vatican.va/holy_

father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_30121987_sollicitudo-rei-socialis_ge.html, 38 (accessed 23 May 2012).

20. David Ryall, ‘How many divisions? The modern development of Catholicinternational relations’, International Relations 14, no. 2 (August 1998):24–5.

21. S. A. Kadayifici-Orellana, ‘Ethno-religious conflicts: Exporing the role ofreligion in conflict resolution’, in The Sage Handbook of Conflict Resolu-tion, ed. Jacob Bercovitch (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2009),264–85.

22. David Little, ed., Peacemakers in Action: Profiles of Religion in ConflictResolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).

23. Iver B. Neumann, ‘The English School on diplomacy’, in Diplomacy, ed.Christer Jönsson and Richard Langhorne 1 (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

180 Notes

Publications, 2004), 92–116, 92-93, 95; Butterfield, Christianity, Diplomacyand War.

24. Sharp, ‘Herbert Butterfield, the English School and the civilizing virtuesof diplomacy’, 877. It is also therefore that English School scholars under-stood moral philosophers as unlikely to succeed in politics where diplo-mats failed. Linklater and Suganami, The English School of InternationalRelations, 226.

25. Martin Wight, ‘Why is there no international theory?’, 17–34.26. Sharp, ‘Herbert Butterfield, the English School and the civilizing virtues

of diplomacy’, 862; Butterfield, History and Human Relations, 26.27. The term ‘inverted revolutionism’ attaches to the third of the ‘three tra-

ditions’ Martin Wight describes. Wight, International Theory. This termpoints towards possibilities to ‘integrate’ also individuals and their her-itage to international relations theory. See also Thomas, The GlobalResurgence of Religion and the Transformation of International Relations, 182.

28. Joseph P. Lash, Dag Hammarskjöld: Custodian of the Bushfire Peace (GardenCity, NY: Doubleday, 1961), 211.

29. Brian Urquhart, ‘The Secretary-General: Why Dag Hammarskjöld’, in TheAdventure of Peace: Dag Hammarskjöld and the Future of the UN, ed. StenAsk and Anna Mark-Jungkoist (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005),14–23, 21.

30. Buzan, From International to World Society?31. Alynna J. Lyon, ‘The UN Charter, the New Testament, and the Psalms:

The moral authority of Dag Hammarskjöld’, in The UN Secretary-Generaland Moral Authority: Ethics and Religion in International Leadership, ed. KentJ. Kille (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2007), 111–41,120. See also Kent J. Kille, ‘The secular Pope: Insights on the UN Secretary-General and moral authority’, in The UN Secretary-General and MoralAuthority: Ethics and Religion in International Leadership, ed. Kent J. Kille(Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2007), 337–54.

32. Buzan, From International to World Society?, 7.33. Costas M. Constantinou, ‘Human diplomacy and spirituality’, Clingendael

Discussion Paper in Diplomacy, no. 103: 17.34. ‘But the explanation of how man should live a life of active social service

in full harmony with himself as a member of the community of the spirit,I found in the writings of those great medieval mystics for whom ‘self-surrender‘ had been the way to self-realization, and who in ‘singleness ofmind‘ and ‘inwardness‘ had found strength to say yes to every demandwhich the needs of their neighbours made them face, and to say yes alsoto every fate life had in store for them when they followed the call ofduty.’ Wilder Foote, ed., Dag Hammarskjöld, Servant of Peace: A Selection ofHis Speeches and Statements (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1962);24.

35. For introductions to Hammarskjöld’s religious thinking see, among hisMarkings, for example, Henry P. van Dusen, Dag Hammarskjöld: The States-man and his Faith (New York, Evanston and London: Harper and Row,Publishers, 1964); Seven Stolpe, Dag Hammarskjöld: A Spiritual Portrait

Notes 181

(New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1966); Aulen, Dag Hammarskjöld’sWhite Book; Rodger Lipsey, ‘Dag Hammarskjöld and Markings: A Recon-sideration’, Spiritus 11 (2011).

36. Hammarskjöld, Markings, 149.37. See, for example, Morgenthau, Truth and Power, 121–6.38. Peter L. Berger, Adventures of an Accidental Sociologist: How to Explain the

World Without Becoming a Bore (Amherst NY: Prometheus Books, 2011),64.

39. Charles Taylor, A Secular Age (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of HarvardUniversity Press, 2007).

40. See, for example, The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, ‘U.S.religious landscape survey: Religious beliefs and practices: diverse andpolitically relevant’, http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report2-religious-landscape-study-full.pdf (accessed 23 May 2012).

41. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, ‘Spirit and power: A 10-country survey of Pentecostals’, Poll, http://pewforum.org/Christian/Evangelical-Protestant-Churches/Spirit-and-Power.aspx (accessed 23 May2012).

42. Colin Campbell, The Easternization of the West: A Thematic Account ofCultural Change in the Modern Era (Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers,2007).

43. Robert Jackson, ‘From colonialism to theology: Encounters with MartinWight’s international thought’, International Affairs 84, no. 2 (2008): 356.

44. José Casanova, Public Religions in the Modern World (Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1994); José Casanova, ‘Public religions revisited’, in PublicReligions Revisited, ed. Hent de Vries (New York: Fordham University Press,2008), 101–19.

45. Alfred Stepan and Graeme B. Robertson, ‘An “Arab” more than a“Muslim” democracy gap’, Journal of Democracy 14 (July 2003). Regardingthe ‘demographic issue’ see, for example, Eric Kaufmann, Shall the Reli-gious inherit the Earth? Demography and Politics in the Twenty-First Century(London: Profile Books, 2010).

46. George Weigel, Faith, Reason, and the War against Jihadism: A Call to Action(New York: Doubleday, 2007), 115.

47. Kubálková, ‘Towards an international political theology’.48. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations, 234.49. Walzer, Thinking Politically, 164. See also Kerstin Kellermann, Politik

und Spiritualität: Auf der Suche nach einer friedliebenden Freiheit (Stuttgart:Kohlhammer, 2005), 181; Johann B. Metz, ed., Zum Begriff der neuenpolitischen Theologie: 1967–1997 (Mainz: Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag,1997).

50. Morgenthau, Scientific Man vs. Power Politics.51. Mouffe, On the Political.52. Martin Wight, ‘Why is there no international theory?’, 17–34, 17.

References

Abdelal, Rawi, Yoshiko M. Herrera, Alastair I. Johnston and Rose McDermott.‘Identity as a variable.’ Perspectives on Politics 4, no. 4 (December 2006):695–711.

Abu-Nimer, Mohammed. Nonviolence and Peacebuilding in Islam: Theory andPractice. Gainsville: University Press of Florida, 2003.

Adamson, Fiona B. ‘Global liberalism versus political Islam: Competing ide-ological frameworks in international politics.’ International Studies Review 7(2005): 547–569.

Adler, Emanuel. ‘Seizing the middle ground: Constructivism in world politics.’European Journal of International Relations 3, no. 3 (1997): 319–363.

Agnew, John. ‘Deus vult: The geopolitics of the Catholic Church.’ Geopolitics15 (2010): 39–61.

Aguilar, Mario I. ‘Sacred rules and secular politics: Religion and rules.’International Relations 20, no. 3 (2006): 315–320.

Albert, Mathias, Lothar Brock and Klaus D. Wolf, eds. Civilizing World Politics:Society and Community Beyond the State. Frankfurt: Rowman and Littlefield,2000.

Albright, Madeleine. The Mighty and the Almighty: Reflections on America, God,and World Affairs. New York: Harper Perennial, 2006.

Allport, Gordon W., and Kenneth Clark. The Nature of Prejudice. 25th anniver-sary ed., [3rd print], unabridged. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books, 2003.

Almeida, Joao. ‘Hedley Bull, “Embedded cosmopolitanism”, and the pluralist–solidarist debate.’ In The Anarchical Society in a Globalized World. Edited byRichard Little and John Williams. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

Annan, Kofi A. ‘Vereint gegen den Terrorismus.’ Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung,22/23 September 2001.

Appleby, R. S. The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconcilia-tion. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2000.

Arendt, Hannah. The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1958.

Aristoteles, Nikomachische Ethik. Stuttgart: Reclam, 2004. Übersetzung undNachwort von Franz Dirlmeier. Anmerkungen von Ernst A. Schmidt.

Aron, Raymond. Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations. GardenCity, NY: Doubleday, 1966.

Art, Robert J., and Robert Jervis, eds. International Politics: Enduring Conceptsand Contemporary Issues. 4th ed. New York: HarperCollins College, 1996.

Ask, Sten, and Anna Mark-Jungkoist, eds. The Adventure of Peace: DagHammarskjöld and the Future of the UN. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,2005.

Assmann, Jan. Moses in Ägypten: Entzifferung einer Gedächtnisspur. 5th ed.Frankfurt: Fischer, 2001.

182

References 183

———Die mosaische Unterscheidung oder der Preis des Monotheismus. Munich:Hanser, 2003.

———‘Monotheismus und die Sprache der Gewalt.’ In Das Gewaltpotential desMonotheismus und der dreieine Gott. Edited by Peter Walter, 18–39. Freiburgi.Br.: Herder, 2005.

Atran, Scott. ‘The moral logic and growth of suicide terrorism.’ The WashingtonQuarterly 29, no. 2 (Spring 2006): 127–147.

Augustine. The City of God. New York: Modern Library, 1994. Translated byMarcus Dods with an introduction by Thomas Merton.

———Translated by H. Bettension. Concerning the City of God Against thePagans. London: Penguin Books, 2003.

Aulen, Gustav. Dag Hammarskjöld’s White Book: An Analysis of Markings.London: S P C K, 1970.

Austin, John L. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge, Mass: HarvardUniversity Press, 1975.

Avalos, Hector. Fighting Words: The Origins of Religious Violence. New York:Prometheus Books, 2005.

Axtmann, Roland. ‘Humanity or enmity? Carl Schmitt on internationalpolitics.’ International Politics 44 (2007): 531–551.

Bagge Lausten, Carsten, and Ole Waever. ‘In defence of religion: Sacred ref-erent objects for securitization.’ Millennium – Journal of International Studies29, no. 3 (2000): 705–739.

Bain, William. ‘One order, two laws: Recovering the “normative” in EnglishSchool theory.’ Review of International Studies 33, no. 4 (2007): 557–575.

Baldwin, David A., ed. Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate.New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.

Banton, Michael, ed. Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion.London: Tavistock Publications, Ltd., 1966.

Barber, Benjamin R. Jihad vs. McWorld: Jihad versus McWorld. New York NY:Times Books, 1995.

———‘Ein Krieg “jeder gegen jeden”: Terror und die Politik der Angst.’ AusPolitik und Zeitgeschichte, no. 18 (2002): 7–16.

Barnett, Michael. ‘Another great awakening? International relations theoryand religion.’ In Religion and International Relations Theory. Edited by JackL. Snyder, 91–114. New York: Columbia University Press, 2011.

Behr, Hartmut, and Amelia Heath. ‘Misreading in IR theory and ideology cri-tique: Morgenthau, Waltz and Neo-Realism.’ Review of International Studies35 (2009): 327–349.

Bell, Duncan, ed. Political Thought and International Relations: Variations on aRealist Theme. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Bellinger, Charles K. ‘Understanding violence: The new Copernican revolu-tion.’ In The Just War and Jihad: Violence in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.Edited by Joseph R. Hoffmann, 63–76. New York: Prometheus Books, 2006.

Bennett, John C. Christian Realism. New York: Scribner, 1952.Bercovitch, Jacob, ed. The Sage Handbook of Conflict Resolution. Thousand Oaks,

CA: SAGE Publications, 2009.

184 References

Berger, Peter L. The Social Reality of Religion. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969.———The Heretical Imperative: Contemporary Possibilities of Religious Affirma-

tion. New York: Doubleday, 1979.———‘The desecularization of the world: A global overview.’ In The

Desecularization of the World. Resurgent Religion and World Politics. Editedby Peter L. Berger, 1–18. Washington, DC: Ethics and Public Policy Center,1999.

———‘Religion and Global Civil Society.’ In Religion in Global Civil Society.Edited by Mark Juergensmeyer, 11–22. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2005.

———‘Secularization falsified.’ First Things, February 2008, 23–27.———Adventures of an Accidental Sociologist: How to explain the World without

becoming a Bore. Amherst N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2011.———, ed. The Desecularization of the World. Resurgent Religion and World

Politics. Washington, DC: Ethics and Public Policy Center, 1999.Berger, Peter L., Grace Davie, and Effie Fokas. Religious America, Secular Europe?

A Theme and Variations. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010.Berggen, Jason D., and Nicole C. Rae. ‘Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush:

Faith, foreign policy, and an evangelical presidential style.’ PresidentialStudies Quarterly 36, no. 4 (December 2006): 606–632.

Bielefeld, Heiner and Heiner Heitmeyer, eds. Politisierte Religion: Ursachen undFormen des modernen Fundamentalismus. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1998.

Bill, James A. The Eagle and the Lion: The Tragedy of American–Iranian Relations.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989.

Blaney, David L., and Naeem Inayatullah. ‘The Westphalian deferral.’ Interna-tional Studies Review 2, no. 2 (2002): 29–64.

Bloom, Mia. Dying to Kill: The Allure of Suicide Terror. Columbia: UniversityPresses of California, 2007.

Boening, Astrid B. ‘Euro-Islam: A constructivist idea or a concept of theEnglish School?’ EUMA 4, no. 12 (May 2007).

Boeve, L. and Christophe Brabant, eds. Between Philosophy and Theology:Contemporary Interpretations of Christianity. Burlington VT: Ashgate Pub.,2010.

Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Ed. E. Bethge, trans. Neville Horton Smith. Ethics.New York: Touchstone, 1995.

Booth, Ken. ‘Navigating the “Absolute Novum”: John Herz’s political Real-ism and political Idealism.’ International Relations 22, no. 4 (2008):510–526.

Booth, Ken and Timothy Dunne, eds. Worlds in Collision: Terror and the Futureof Global Order. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

Brassett, James, and Dan Bulley. ‘Ethics in world politics: Cosmopolitanismand beyond?’ International Politics 44 (2007): 1–18.

Brecher, Michael and Frank P. Harvey, eds. Realism and Institutionalism inInternational Studies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002.

Brocker, Manfred and Mathias Hildebrandt, eds. Friedensstiftende Religionen?Religion und die Deeskalation politischer Konflikte. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fürSozialwissenschaften, 2008.

References 185

Brown, Chris. ‘International theory and international society: The viability ofthe middle way.’ Review of International Studies 21, no. 2 (1995): 183–196.

———, ed. Political Reconstructing in Europe: Ethical Perspectives. London:Routledge, 1994.

Brown, Robert M., ed. The Essential Reinhold Niebuhr: Selected Essays andAddresses. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1986.

Bull, Hedley. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London:Macmillan, 1977.

———The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. 3rd ed.New York: Columbia University Press, 2002.

Bull, Hedley, and Adam Watson. The Expansion of International Society. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1984.

Burger, Rudolf. Retheologisierung der Politik und weltpolitischeKonfliktkonstellationen. Wien: Schriftenreihe der Landesverteidigungsa-kademie, 2004.

Butler, Judith, Ernesto Laclau, and Slavoj Zizek, eds. Contingency, Hegemony,Universality – Contemporary Dialogues of the Left. London: Verso, 2000.

Butterfield, Herbert. Christianity and History. New York: Charles Scribner’sSons, 1950.

———History and Human Relations. London: Harper Collins, 1951.———Christianity, Diplomacy and War. New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press,

1954.Butterfield, Herbert and Martin Wight, eds. Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in

the Theory of International Politics. London: Allen and Unwin, 1966.Buzan, Barry. From International to World Society? English School Theory and

the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2004.

———‘An English School perspective on “What kind of world order?”.’Cooperation and Conflict 41, no. 4 (2006): 364–369.

———‘Culture and international society.’ International Affairs 86, no. 1 (2010):1–26.

Buzan, Barry, and Richard Little. International Systems in World History: Remak-ing the Study of International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2000.

Campbell, Colin. The Easternization of the West: A Thematic Account of CulturalChange in the Modern Era. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2007.

Canetti, Elias. Crowds and Power. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux, 1984.Carlson, John D. ‘The morality, politics, and irony of war: Recovering

Reinhold Niebuhr’s ethical Realism.’ Journal of Religious Ethics 36, no. 4(2008): 619–651.

Carr, Edward H. The Twenty Years’ Crisis: 1919–1939. 2nd ed. London:Macmillan, 1946.

———The Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of Inter-national Relations. Reissue with a new introduction and additional materialby Michael Cox. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2001.

Carrette, Jeremy R. Foucault and Religion: Spiritual Corporality and PoliticalSpirituality. London, New York: Routledge, 2000.

186 References

Casanova, José. Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1994.

———‘Aggiornamenti? Katholische und muslimische Politik im Vergleich.’Leviathan 34, no. 3 (September 2006): 305–320.

———‘Public religions revisited.’ In Public Religions Revisited. Edited by Hentde Vries, 101–19. New York: Fordham University Press, 2008.

———‘Balancing religious freedom and cultural preservation.’ The Review ofFaith and International Affairs 6, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 13–15.

Casebeer, William D. ‘Knowing evil when you see it: Uses for the rhetoricof evil in international relations.’ International Relations 18, no. 4 (2004):441–451.

Cavanaugh, William T. The Myth of Religious Violence: Secular Ideology and theRoots of Modern Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Cheah, Pheng, and Bruce Robbins. Cosmopolitics: Thinking and Feeling Beyondthe Nation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998.

Childress, James F. ‘Just-War theories: The Bases, interrelations, priorities, andfunctions of their criteria.’ Theological Studies 39 (1978): 427–445.

Christiansen, Drew. ‘Catholic peacemaking: From Pacem in Terris to CentesimusAnnus.’ A Talk prepared for The United States Institute of Peace. http://www.restorativejustice.org/resources/docs/christiansen (accessed 23 May 2012).

Churchill, Winston. The Gathering Storm. The Second World War. Boston:Houghton Mifflin, 1985, 1948.

Clark, Ian. Legitimacy in International Society. Oxford, New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 2005.

Cochran, Molly. ‘Charting the ethics of the English School: What “good” isthere in a middle-ground ethics?’ International Studies Quarterly 53 (2009):203–225.

Coll, Alberto R. The Wisdom of Statecraft: Sir Herbert Butterfield and thePhilosophy of International Politics. Durham: Duke University Press, 1985.

Connolly, William E. Pluralism. Durham NC and London: Duke UniversityPress, 2005.

Constantinou, Costas M. ‘Human diplomacy and spirituality.’ ClingendaelDiscussion Paper in Diplomacy, no. 103.

Cortright, David. Peace: A History of Movements and Ideas. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Coser, Lewis A. The Function of Social Conflict. New York: Free Press, 1956.Coward, Harold and Gordon S. Smith, eds. Religion and Peacebuilding. Albany:

State University of New York Press, 2004.Cox, Brian, and Daniel Philpott. ‘Faith-based diplomacy: An ancient idea

newly emergent.’ The Brandywine Review of Faith and International Affairs1, no. 2 (Fall 2003): 31–40.

Cox, Harvey. Religion in the Secular City: Towards a Postmodern Theology.New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984.

Cozette, Murielle. ‘What lies ahead: Classical Realism on the futureof international relations.’ International Studies Review 10 (2008):667–679.

References 187

Crocker, Chester A., Fen H. Osler, and Pamela Aall, eds. Managing Global Chaos:Sources of and Responses to International Conflict. Washington DC: UnitedStates Institute of Peace Press, 1996.

Crowder, George. ‘Pluralism and liberalism.’ Political Studies Review 42 (1994):293–305.

———Isaiah Berlin: Liberty and Pluralism. Cambridge: Polity, 2004.Cutler, Clair A. ‘The “Grotian tradition” in International Relations.’ Review of

International Studies 17, no. 1 (1991): 41–65.Dacey, Austin. The Secular Conscience: Why Belief Belongs in Public Life.

Amherst, N.Y: Prometheus Books, 2008.Dallmayr, Fred. ‘A global spiritual resurgence? On Christian and Islamic spir-

itualities.’ In Religion in International Relations: The Return from Exile. Editedby Pavlos a. P. F. Hatzopoulos, 209–36. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,2003.

Davie, Grace. Europe: The Exceptional Case: Parameters of Faith in the ModernWorld. London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 2002.

Dawkins, Richard. ‘Imagine no religion.’ http://richarddawkins.net/articles/1(accessed 23 May 2012).

———The God Delusion. London: Black Swan, 2007.Deudney, Daniel, and John G. Ikenberry. ‘The nature and sources of liberal

international order.’ Review of International Studies 25 (1999): 179–196.Devlen, Balkan, Patrick James, and Özgür Özdamar. ‘The English School, inter-

national relations, and progress.’ International Studies Review 7 (June 2005):171–197.

Dijkink, Gertjan. ‘When geopolitics and religion fuse: A historical perspec-tive.’ Geopolitics 11 (2006): 192–208.

Dorrien, Gary J. Social Ethics in the Making: Interpreting an American Tradition.Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.

Draper, G. I. A. D. ‘The Christian and war.’ International Relations 2, no. 6(1962): 378–397.

Duffy Toft, Monica. ‘Getting religion? The puzzling case of Islam and civilwar.’ International Security 31, no. 4 (Spring 2007): 97–131.

Dundes, Alan. Sacred Narrative. Readings in the Theory of Myth. Berkeley, LosAngeles, London: University of California Press, 1984.

Dunne, Tim. Inventing International Society: A History of the English School.Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1998.

———‘The English School.’ In International Relation Theories: Discipline andDiversity. Edited by Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki and Steven Smith, 127–47.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Dunne, Tim, Milja Kurki, and Steven Smith, eds. International Relation Theories:Discipline and Diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Durkheim, Emile. Translated by Joseph Ward Sawin. The Elementary Forms ofthe Religious Life. New York: The Free Press, 1947.

Edwards, Mark. ‘ “God has chosen us”: Re-membering Christian Realism, res-cuing Christendom, and the contest of responsibilities during the ColdWar.’ Diplomatic History 33, no. 1 (January 2009): 67–93.

188 References

Erskine, Toni. ‘Qualifying cosmopolitanism? Solidarity, criticism, and MichaelWalzer’s “View from the Cave”.’ International Politics 44 (2007): 125–149.

Esposito, John L. a. M. W., ed. Religion and Global Order. Cardiff: University ofWales Press, 2000.

Etzioni, Amitai. Die aktive Gesellschaft: Eine Theorie gesellschaftlicher undpolitischer Prozesse. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1975.

———Die Entdeckung des Gemeinwesens: Ansprüche, Verantwortlichkeiten und dasProgramm des Kommunitarismus. Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel, 1995.

———The Common Good. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2004.Farr, Thomas F. World of Faith and Freedom: Why International Religious Liberty is

Vital to American National Security. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press,2008.

Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. ‘International norms dynamicsand political change.’ International Organization 52, no. 4 (Autumn 1998):887–917.

Finnis, John F., Joseph M. Boyle, JR., and Germain Grisez. Nuclear Deterrence,Morality and Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.

Fitzgerald, Timothy. Religion and Politics in International Relations: The ModernMyth. New York: Continuum, 2011.

Foote, Wilder, ed. Dag Hammarskjöld: Servant of Peace. New York, Evanston:Harper and Row, Publishers, 1962; A Selection of His Speeches and State-ments.

Fox, Jonathan. ‘State failure and the clash of civilisations: An examina-tion of the magnitude and extent of domestic civilizational conflict from1950 to 1996.’ Australian Journal of Political Science 38, no. 2 (July 2003):195–213.

———‘Religion and state failure: An examination of the extent and magnitudeof religious conflicts from 1950 to 1996.’ International Political Science Review25, no. 1 (2004): 55–76.

Fox, Jonathan, and Shmuel Sandler. Bringing Religion into International Rela-tions. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

Frankel, Charles. Morality and U.S. Foreign Policy. New York, NY: Foreign PolicyAssoc., 1975.

Fraser, Giles. Christianity and Violence: Girard, Nietzsche, Anselm and Tutu.London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 2001.

Frei, Christoph. Hans J. Morgenthau: An intellectual biography. Baton Rouge:Louisiana State University Press, 2001.

Friedrichs, Jörg. European Approaches to International Relation Theory: A Housewith many mansions. London, New York: Routledge, 2004.

Fröhlich, Manuel. Dag Hammarskjöld und die Vereinten Nationen: Die politischeEthik des Generalsekretärs. Paderborn et al.: Schöhning, 2002.

Frost, Mervyn. ‘Tragedy, ethics and international relations.’ InternationalRelations 17, no. 4 (2003): 477–495.

Fukuyama, Francis. ‘The West may be coming apart.’ The Straits Times,August 10, 2002. http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27b/094.html(accessed 23 May 2012).

References 189

———‘History and September 11.’ In Worlds in Collision: Terror and theFuture of Global Order. Edited by Ken Booth and Timothy Dunne, 27–36.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

Fuller, Graham. ‘The next ideology.’ Foreign Policy, no. 98 (1995): 145–158.Garton Ash, Timothy. ‘Davos man’s death wish.’ The Guardian, February 3,

2005. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/feb/03/globalisation.comment (accessed 23 May 2012).

Geertz, Clifford. ‘Religion as a cultural system.’ In Anthropological Approachesto the Study of Religion. Edited by Michael Banton, 1–46. London: TavistockPublications, Ltd., 1966.

———The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, 1973.Gellner, Ernst. Conditions of Liberty: Civil Society and its Rivals. London: Hamish

Hamilton, 1994.Gibbs, Nancy, and Michael Duffy. The Preacher and the Presidents: Billy Graham

in the White House. New York: Center Street, 2007.Girard, René. Das Ende der Gewalt: Analyse des Menschheitsverhängnisses.

Freiburg im Breisgau, Wien: Herder, 1983.———The Scapegoat. Baltimore MD: John Hopkins University Press, 1986.———Translated by Stephen Bann (Books II and III) and Michael Metteer

(Book I).Things Hidden since the Foundation of the World: Research Undertakenin Collaboration with Jean-Michel Ougourlian and Guy Lefort. London: AthlonePress, 1987.

———Translated by Patrick Gregory.Violence and the Sacred. London: AthlonePress, 1988.

———A Theater of Envy: William Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1991.

———‘Triangular Desire.’ In The Girard Reader. Edited by René Girard andJames G. Williams, 33–44. New York: Crossroad and Herder, 1996.

———With Pierpaolo Antonello and Joao Cezar de Castro Rocha. Evolutionand Conversion: Dialogues on the Origin of Culture. London: Continuum, 2008,original edition 2000.

Girard, René and James G. Williams, eds. The Girard Reader. New York:Crossroad and Herder, 1996.

Gopin, Marc. Between Eden and Armageddon: The Future of World Religions,Violence, and Peacemaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

———Holy War, Holy Peace: How Religion can bring Peace to the Middle East.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Graf, Friedrich W. Moses Vermächtnis: Über göttliche und menschliche Gesetze.München: C.H. Beck, 2006.

Griffiths, Martin. Fifty Key Thinkers in International Relations. London andNew York: Routledge, 1999.

Grim, Brian J., and Roger Finke. The Price of Freedom Denied: Religious Persecu-tion and Conflict in the 21st Century. New York: Cambridge University Press,2011.

Grossheutschi, Felix. Carl Schmitt und die Lehre vom Katechon. Berlin: Dunckerand Humblot, 1996.

190 References

Grovogui, Siba N. ‘The new cosmopolitanisms: Subtexts, pretexts and contextof ethics.’ International Relations 19, no. 1 (2005): 103–113.

Guilhot, Nicolas. ‘American Katechon: When political theology became inter-national relations theory.’ Constellations 17, no. 2 (2010): 224–253.

———, ed. The Invention of International Relations Theory: Realism, the RockefellerFoundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory. New York: Columbia Univer-sity Press, 2011.

Gurr, Ted R. ‘Minorities, nationalists, and ethnopolitical conflict.’ In Manag-ing Global Chaos: Sources of and Responses to International Conflict. Edited byChester A. Crocker, Fen H. Osler and Pamela Aall. Washington D.C.: UnitedStates Institute of Peace Press, 1996.

Gutiérrez, Gustavo. Theologie der Befreiung. München: Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, 1973.

Guzzini, Stefano. ‘A reconstruction of Constructivism in international rela-tions.’ European Journal of International Relations 6, no. 2 (2000): 147–182.

Habermas, Jürgen. Glauben und Wissen. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 2001.Hacke, Christian, and Jana Puglierin. ‘John H. Herz: Balancing utopia and

reality.’ International Relations 21, no. 3 (2007): 367–382.Hall, Ian. ‘Still the English Patient? Closures and inventions in the English

School.’ International Affairs 77, no. 2 (2001): 931–942.———‘History, Christianity and diplomacy: Sir Herbert Butterfield and inter-

national relations.’ Review of International Studies 28 (2002): 719–736.———The International Thought of Martin Wight. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan, 2006.Halliday, Fred. ‘The Romance of Non-State Actors.’ In Non-State Actors in World

Politics. Edited by Daphne a. W. W. Josselin, 21–40. New York: Palgrave,2001.

Hallward, Maia C. ‘Situating the “secular”: Negotiating the boundary betweenreligion and politics.’ International Political Sociology 2, no. 1 (2008):1–16.

Hamerton-Kelley, Robert, ed. Politics and Apocalypse. Morill Hall: MichiganState University Press, 2007.

Hamerton-Kelly, Robert, ed. Violent Origins. Walter Burkert, René Girardand Jonathan Z. Smith on Ritual Killing and Cultural Formation. StanfordCalifornia: Stanford University Press, 1987.

Hammarskjöld, Dag. Markings: Transl. from the Swedish by Leif Sjöberg and W. H.Auden. New York: Vintage Spiritual Classics, 2006.

Hanson, Eric O. The Catholic Church in World Politics. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1987.

———Religion and Politics in the International System Today. New York:Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Hasenclever, Andreas. ‘Merkmale gewaltresistenter Glaubensgemeinschaften:Überlegungen zum Schutz religiöser Überlieferung vor politischerVereinnahmung.’ In Friedensstiftende Religionen? Religion und die Deeskalationpolitischer Konflikte. Edited by Manfred Brocker and Mathias Hildebrandt,179–201. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2008.

References 191

Hasenclever, Andreas, and Alexander DeJuan. ‘Grasping the impact of reli-gious traditions on political conflicts: Empirical findings and theoreticalperspectives.’ Die Friedenswarte. Journal of International Peace and Organiza-tion 82, 2–3 (2007): 19–47.

Hasenclever, Andreas, and Volker Rittberger. ‘Does religion make a differ-ence? Theoretical approaches to the impact of faith on political conflict.’Millennium – Journal of International Studies 29, no. 3 (2000): 641–674.

———‘Does religion make a difference? Theoretical approaches to the impactof faith on political conflict.’ In Religion in International Relations: The Returnfrom Exile. Edited by Pavlos a. P. F. Hatzopoulos, 107–45. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.

Hassner, Ron. ‘Fighting insurgencies on sacred ground.’ The WashingtonQuarterly 29, no. 2 (Spring 2006): 149–166.

Hassner, Ron E. War on Sacred Grounds. Ithaca: Cornell University Press,2009.

Hatzopoulos, Pavlos a. P. F., ed. Religion in International Relations: The Returnfrom Exile. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.

Hauerwas, Stanley. A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive ChristianSocial Ethic. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981.

Haynes, Jeffrey. Religion in Third World Politics. Boulder, CO: Lynne RiennerPublishers, 1994.

———Religion in Global Politics. London and New York: Longman, 1998.———‘Religion and international relations after “9/11”.’ Democratization 12,

no. 3 (June 2005): 398–413.———An Introduction to International Relations and Religion. Harlow: Pearson,

2007.Henderson, Errol A., and Richard Tucker. ‘Clear and present strangers: the

clash of civilizations and international conflict.’ International Studies Quar-terly 45 (2001): 317–338.

Hertzke, Allen. ‘Roman Catholicism and the faith-based movement for globalhuman rights.’ The Review of Faith and International Affairs 3, no. 3 (Winter2005/2006): 19–24.

Herz, John. Political Realism and Political Idealism: A Study in Theories andRealities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951.

Hobbes, Thomas. The Leviathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1991.

Hoffmann, Joseph R. ‘Positioning the question of religious violence.’ In TheJust War and Jihad: Violence in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Edited byJoseph R. Hoffmann, 47–62. New York: Prometheus Books, 2006.

———, ed. The Just War and Jihad: Violence in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.New York: Prometheus Books, 2006.

Hondrich, Karl O. ‘Auf dem Weg zu einer Weltgewaltordnung.’ Neue ZürcherZeitung, March 22, 2003. http://www.uni-muenster.de/PeaCon/global-texte/g-w/n/NZZ-hondrichswelt.htm (accessed 23 May 2012).

Hopf, Ted. ‘The promise of Constructivism in international relations theory.’International Security 23, no. 1 (1998): 171–200.

192 References

Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of WorldOrder. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster, 2003.

———‘Dead Souls: The denationalization of the American elite.’ The NationalInterest, Spring 2004.

Hurd, Elizabeth S. ‘Theorizing religious resurgence.’ International Politics 44,no. 6 (2007): 647–665.

———The Politics of Secularism in International Relations. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press, 2008.

Ish-Shalom, Piki. ‘The triptych of realism, elitism, and conservatism.’ Interna-tional Studies Review 8 (2006): 441–468.

Jackson, Robert. ‘Pluralism in international political theory.’ Review of Interna-tional Studies 18 (April 1992): 271–281.

———The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States. New York:Oxford University Press, 2000.

———‘From colonialism to theology: Encounters with Martin Wight’s inter-national thought.’ International Affairs 84, no. 2 (2008): 351–364.

James, Helen, ed. Civil Society, Religion and Gobal Governance: Paradigms ofPower and Persuasion. New York: Routledge, 2007.

James, Patrick. International Relations and Scientific Progress: Structural RealismReconsidered. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2002.

Jeffery, Renée. ‘Australian Realism and international relations: John Andersonand Hedley Bull on ethics, religion and society.’ International Politics 45(2008): 52–71.

Jenkins, Philip. The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Jervis, Robert. ‘Realism, neoliberalism, and cooperation: Understanding thedebate.’ International Security 24, no. 1 (1999): 42–63.

Johannes Paul II. ‘Sollicitudo rei socialis.’ http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_30121987_sollicitudo-rei-socialis_ge.html (accessed 23 May 2012).

John Paul II. ‘Address to the United Nations General Assembly.’ http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02u1.htm (accessed 23 May 2012).

John Paul VI. Pacem in Terris. Vatican, 1963. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_11041963_pacem_en.html (accessed 23 May 2012).

John Paul, and John-Peter Pham. Centesimus Annus: Assessment and perspec-tives for the future Catholic social doctrine: Proceedings of the InternationalCongress on the Fifth Anniversary of the Promulgation of the Encyclical Let-ter Centesimus Annus, Rome, April 29–30, 1997. Città del Vaticano: LibreriaEditrice Vaticana, 1998.

Johnson, James T. ‘The idea of defense in historical and contemporarythinking about Just War.’ Journal of Religious Ethics 36, no. 4 (2008):543–556.

Johnston, Douglas. ‘The Churches and Apartheid in South Africa.’ In Reli-gion: The Missing Dimension of Statecraft. Edited by Douglas M. Johnston andCynthia Sampson, 177–207. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.

References 193

Johnston, Douglas M. and Cynthia Sampson, eds. Religion: The MissingDimension of Statecraft. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.

Jones, Charles A. ‘Christian Realism and the foundations of the EnglishSchool.’ International Relations 17, no. 3 (2003): 371–387.

Jones, Roy E. ‘The English School of international relations: A case for closure.’Review of International Studies 7, no. 1 (1981): 1–13.

Jönsson, Christer and Richard Langhorne, eds. Diplomacy 1. Thousand Oaks,CA: SAGE Publications, 2004.

Josselin, Daphne a. W. W., ed. Non-State Actors in World Politics. New York:Palgrave, 2001.

Juergensmeyer, Mark. The New Cold War? Religious Nationalism Confronts theSecular State. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994.

———Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. 3 ed., rev.and updated. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.

———Global Rebellion: Religious Challenges to the Secular State from ChristianMilitias to Al Qaeda. Rev. ed. Berkeley: University of California Press,2008.

———, ed. Religion in Global Civil Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2005.

Kadayifici-Orellana, S. A. ‘Ethno-religious conflicts: Exploring the role of reli-gion in conflict resolution.’ In The Sage Handbook of Conflict Resolution.Edited by Jacob Bercovitch, 264–85. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications,2009.

Kamergrauzis, Normunds. The Persistence of Christian Realism: A Study of theSocial Ethics of Ronald H. Preston. Uppsala: Uppsala University Press, 2001.

Kaplan, Morton A. ‘The new Great Debate: Traditionalism vs. science ininternational relations.’ World Politics 19, no. 1 (1966): 1–20.

Kaplan, Robert D. The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post ColdWar. New York: Vintage Books, 2001.

———Warrior Politics: Why Leadership demands a Pagan Ethos. New York:Random House, 2002.

Kaufmann, Eric. Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth? Demography and Politics inthe Twenty-First Century. London: Profile Books, 2010.

Keck, Margaret E., and Kathryn Sikkink. ‘Transnational advocacy networksin international politics: Introduction.’ In Essential Readings in World Pol-itics. Edited by Karen A. Mingst and Jack L. Snyder. 2nd ed., 222–33.New York: Norton, 2004.

———Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998.

Keens-Soper, Maurice. Europe in the World: The Persistence of Power Politics.Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1998.

Kegley, Charles W., ed. Controversies in International Relations Theory: Realismand the Neoliberal Challenge. New York: St Martin’s Press, 1995.

Kellermann, Kerstin. Politik und Spiritualität: Auf der Suche nach einer friedlieben-den Freiheit. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2005.

Kennan, George. Around the Cragged Hill. New York: W.W. Norton, 1993.

194 References

Kennan, George F. ‘Foreign policy and Christian conscience.’ The AtlanticMonthly, no. 5 (May 1959): 44–49.

———Memoiren eines Diplomaten. München: DTV, 1982.Kennedy-Pipe, Carolin. ‘International history and international relations the-

ory: A dialogue beyond the Cold War.’ International Affairs 76, no. 4 (2000):741–754.

Keohane, Robert O. ‘The globalization of informal violence, theories ofworld politics, and the “Liberalism of Fear”.’ IO-Dialogue, Spring 2002,29–43.

Keohane, Robert O. and Joseph Nye, eds. Transnational Relations and WorldPolitics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970.

———Power and Independence: World Power in Transition. Boston: Little, Brown,1977.

Keohane, Robert O., ed. Neorealism and its Critics. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1986.

Kepel, Gilles. The Revenge of God: The Resurgence of Islam, Christianity andJudaism in the Modern World. Cambridge: Polity, 1994.

Kermani, Navid. ‘Die Terroristen sind unter uns.’ Die Zeit, September 28,2006. 40.

Kille, Kent J. ‘The secular Pope: Insights on the UN Secretary-General andmoral authority.’ In The UN Secretary-General and Moral Authority: Ethicsand Religion in International Leadership. Edited by Kent J. Kille, 337–54.Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2007.

———, ed. The UN Secretary-General and Moral Authority: Ethics and Religionin International Leadership. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press,2007.

Kimball, Charles. When Religion becomes Evil: Five warning Signs. San Francisco:Harper Collins, 2003.

Kirshner, Jonathan. ‘The tragedy of offensive realism: Classical Realism andthe rise of China.’ European Journal of International Relations 18, no. 1 (2012):53–75.

Klusmeyer, Douglas. ‘Beyond tragedy: Hannah Arendt and Hans Morgenthauon responsibility, evil and political ethics.’ International Studies Review 11(2009): 332–351.

Knight, Kevin. The MacIntyre Reader. Notre Dame IN: University of NotreDame Press, 1998.

Kubálková, Vendulka. ‘Foreign policy, international politics, and Construc-tivism.’ In International Relations in a Constructed World. Edited by VendulkaKubálková, Nicholas G. Onuf and Paul Kowert, 15–37. Armonk, NJ: Sharpe,1998.

———‘Towards an international political theology.’ Millennium – Journal ofInternational Studies 29, no. 3 (2000): 675–704.

———‘Introduction.’ In Foreign Policy in a Constructed World. Edited byVendulka Kubálková, 3–11. Armonk, London: M.E. Sharpe, 2001.

———‘A “Turn to religion” in international relations?’ Perspectives: CentralEuropean Review of International Affairs 17, no. 2 (2009): 13–41.

References 195

———, ed. Foreign Policy in a Constructed World. Armonk, London: M.E. Sharpe,2001.

Kubálková, Vendulka, Nicholas G. Onuf, and Paul Kowert, eds. InternationalRelations in a Constructed World. Armonk, NJ: Sharpe, 1998.

Kuklick, Bruce. Blind Oracles: Intellectuals and War from Kennan to Kissinger. 3rdprinting, and 1st paperback printing. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress, 2007.

Küng, Hans, and Karl J. Kuschel. Erklärung zum Weltethos: Die Deklaration desParlaments der Weltreligionen. München: Piper, 1993.

Kurth, James. ‘The Vatican’s foreign policy.’ The National Interest, no. 32(Summer 1993): 30–52.

Lang, Anthony, Nicholas Rengger, and Wiliam Walker. ‘The role(s) of rules:some conceptual clarifications.’ International Relations 20, no. 3 (2006):274–294.

Lapid, Yosef and Friedrich Kratochwil, eds. The Return of Culture and Identity inInternational Relation Theory. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1996.

Lash, Joseph P. Dag Hammarskjöld: Custodian of the Bushfire Peace. Garden City,NY: Doubleday, 1961.

Lebow, Richard N. The Tragic Vision of Politics: Ethics, Interests and Orders.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

———A Cultural Theory of International Relations. Cambridge, New York:Cambridge University Press, 2008.

———‘Identity and international relations.’ International Relations 22, no. 4(2008): 473–492.

Lee, Alexander. ‘Who becomes a terrorist? Poverty, education, and the originsof political violence.’ World Politics 63, no. 2 (2011): 203–245.

Leustean, Lucian N. ‘Towards an integrative theory of religion and politics.’Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 17 (2005): 364–381.

Lewis, Thomas A. ‘On the limits of narrative: Communities in pluralisticsociety.’ Journal of Religion 86, no. 1 (2006): 55–80.

Lieven, Anatola and John Hulsman. Ethical Realism: A Vision for America’s Rolein the World. New York, NY: Pantheon Books, 2006.

Linklater, Andrew. The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Founda-tions of the Post-Westphalian Era. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998.

———‘Cosmopolitan political communities in international relations.’ Inter-national Relations 16, no. 1 (2002): 135–150.

———‘Distant suffering and cosmopolitan obligations.’ International Politics44 (2007): 19–36.

Linklater, Andrew, and Hidemi Suganami. The English School of InternationalRelations: A Contemporary Reassessment. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 2006.

Lipschutz, Ronnie. ‘Reconstructing World Politics: The Emergence of GlobalCivil Society.’ Millennium – Journal of International Studies 21, no. 3 (1992):389–420.

Lipsey, Rodger. ‘Dag Hammarskjöld and Markings: A reconsideration.’ Spiritus11 (2011): 84–103.

196 References

Little, David, ed. Peacemakers in Action: Profiles of Religion in Conflict Resolution.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Little, Richard. ‘The English School vs. American Realism.’ Review of Interna-tional Studies 29, no. 3 (2003): 443–460.

———The Balance of Power in International Relations: Metaphors, Myths, andModels. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Little, Richard and John Williams, eds. The Anarchical Society in a GlobalizedWorld. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

Lobell, Steven E., Norrin M. Ripsman, and Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, eds.Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy. Cambridge et al.:Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Lott, Micah. ‘Reasonably traditional: Self-contradiction and self-referencein Alasdair MacIntyre’s account of tradition-based rationality.’ Journal ofReligious Ethics 30, no. 3 (2002): 315–339.

Lovin, Robert W. Reinhold Niebuhr and Christian Realism. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1995.

———Christian Ethics: An Essential Guide. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press,2000.

Lukacs, John. George Kennan: A Study of Character. New Haven, CT: YaleUniversity Press, 2007.

Lynch, Cecelia. ‘Acting on belief: Christian perspective on suffering andviolence.’ Ethics and International Affairs 14, no. 1 (2000): 83–97.

Lynch, Timothy J. ‘Kristol Balls: Neoconservative visions of Islam and theMiddle East.’ International Politics 45 (2008): 182–211.

Lyon, Alynna J. ‘The UN Charter, the New Testament, and the Psalms:The moral authority of Dag Hammarskjöld.’ In The UN Secretary-Generaland Moral Authority: Ethics and Religion in International Leadership. Editedby Kent J. Kille, 111–41. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press,2007.

MacIntyre, Alasdair. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame, Ind.:Notre Dame Press, 1981.

———After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. 2nd ed. Notre Dame Ind.:University of Notre Dame Press, 1984.

———Geschichte der Ethik im Überblick. Frankfurt a.M.: Hain, 1991.———Der Verlust der Tugend: Zur moralischen Krise der Gegenwart. Frankfurt a.M.

and New York: Suhrkamp, 1995.Madeley, John T. S. Religion and Politics. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002.Maghroori, Ray and Bennett Ramberg, eds. Globalism versus Realism: Interna-

tional Relations’ Third Debate. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1982.Manemann, Jürgen. ‘Monotheismus und Demokratie: Eine

Standortbestimmung.’ In Westliche Moderne, Christentum und Islam.Gewalt als Anfrage an monotheistische Religionen. Edited by Wolfgang Palaver,Roman Siebenrock and Dietmar Regensburger, 59–76. Innsbruck: InnsbruckUniversity Press, 2008.

Mapel, David R. and Terry Nardin, eds. International Society: Diverse EthicalPerspectives. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998.

References 197

March, Andrew F. ‘Reading Tariq Ramadan: Political liberalism, Islam, and“Overlapping consensus”.’ Ethics and International Affairs 21, no. 4 (Winter2007): 399–413.

Martin, David. Tongues of Fire: The Explosion of Protestantism in Latin America.Oxford: Blackwell, 1993.

———‘The evangelical upsurge and its political implications.’ In TheDesecularization of the World. Resurgent Religion and World Politics. Edited byPeter L. Berger, 37–49. Washington, DC: Ethics and Public Policy Center,1999.

Mayall, James. World Politics: Progress and its Limits. Cambridge: Polity, 2000.McCann, Dennis P. ‘Hermeneutics and ethics: The example of Reinhold

Niebuhr.’ Journal of Religious Ethics 8, no. 1 (1980): 27–53.McIntyre, C. T. Herbert Butterfield: Historian as Dissenter. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press, 2004.Mead, Walter R. ‘God’s country?’ Foreign Affairs 85, no. 5 (September/October

2006): 24–43.Mearsheimer, John J. ‘Back to the future: Instability in Europe after the Cold

War.’ International Security 15, 5–56 (1990).———The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton, 2001.———‘Hans J. Morgenthau and the Iraq War: Realists versus neocon-

servatives.’ http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy-americanpower/morgenthau_2522.jsp (accessed 23 May 2012).

Mearsheimer, John J., and Stephen M. Walt. ‘An unnecessary war.’ ForeignPolicy, no. 134 (January/February 2003): 51–62.

———The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. New York: Farrar Straus andGiroux, 2008.

Megoran, Nick. ‘Christianity and political geography: On faith and geopolit-ical imagination.’ The Brandywine Review of Faith and International Affairs 2,no. 2 (Fall 2004): 40–46.

Mellon, James. ‘Religion, Politics and Strategic Studies.’ Journal of Military andStrategic Studies 5, no. 1 (Fall 2002). http://www.jmss.org/2002/article2.html(accessed 23 May 2012).

Metz, Johann B., ed. Zum Begriff der neuen politischen Theologie: 1967–1997.Mainz: Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, 1997.

Micklethwait, John W. A. God is Back: How the Global Revival of Faith isChallenging the World. London: Penguin Books, 2009.

Mingst, Karen A. and Jack L. Snyder, eds. Essential Readings in World Politics.2nd ed. New York: Norton, 2004.

Mitchell, Joshua. ‘Religion is not a preference.’ The Journal of Politics 69, no. 2(May 2007): 351–362.

Mohan, Raja C. ‘Catharsis and catalysis: Transforming the South Asiansubcontinent.’ In Worlds in Collision: Terror and the Future of Global Order.Edited by Ken Booth and Timothy Dunne, 205–14. Basingstoke: PalgraveMacmillan, 2004.

Mollov, Ben. Power and Transcendence: Hans J. Morgenthau and the JewishExperience. Lanham, MD: Lexington, 2002.

198 References

Mollov, Ben, Ephraim Meir, and Chaim Lavie. ‘An integrated strategy forpeacebuilding: Judaic approaches.’ Die Friedenswarte. Journal of InternationalPeace and Organization 82, 2–3 (2007): 137–158.

Molloy, Sean. ‘Bridging realism and christianity in the international thoughtof Martin Wight.’ University of Kent at Canterbury, September 8, 2001.

———‘The Realist logic of international society.’ Cooperation and Conflict 38(June 2003): 83–99.

———‘Hans J. Morgenthau versus E. H. Carr: Conflicting conceptions of ethicsin Realism.’ In Political Thought and International Relations: Variations on aRealist Theme. Edited by Duncan Bell, 83–104. Oxford, New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 2009.

Molloy, Seán. The Hidden History of Realism: A Genealogy of Power Politics.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

Morgenthau, Hans J. ‘Positivism, functionalism, and international law.’ TheAmerican Journal of International Law 34, no. 2 (April 1940): 260–284.

———‘The evil of politics and the ethics of evil.’ Ethics 56, no. 1 (October1945): 1–18.

Morgenthau, Hans J. Scientific Man vs. Power Politics. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1946.

Morgenthau, Hans J. ‘The rediscovery of imagination and religion: ArnoldToynbee.’ Dilemmas in Democratic Politics, 1955.

———Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. 2nd ed.New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956.

———Truth and Power: Essays of a Decade, 1960–1970. New York: Praeger, 1970.———Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. 5th ed.

New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978.———‘The future of diplomacy.’ In International Politics: Enduring Concepts and

Contemporary Issues. Edited by Robert J. Art and Robert Jervis. 4th ed., 7–16.New York: Harper, 1996.

———‘The moral blindness of scientific man.’ In Art; Jervis, InternationalPolitics, 7–16.

Morgenthau, Hans J. and Anthony F. Lang, eds. Political Theory and Interna-tional Affairs: Hans J. Morgenthau on Aristotle’s ‘The Politics’. Westport, CT:Praeger, 2004.

Morgenthau, Hans J., and David Hein. Essays on Lincoln’s Faith and Politics.Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1983.

Morgenthau, Hans J. ‘Fragment of an intellectual autobiography: 1904–1932.’ In Truth and Tragedy: A Tribute to Hans J. Morgenthau. Eds. KennethThompson and Robert J. Myers, 1–17. New Brunswick et al.: TransactionBooks, 1984.

Morgenthau, Hans J., Hartmut Behr, Felix Rösch, and Maeva Vidal. TheConcept of the Political. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.

Mouffe, Chantal. On the Political. London: Routledge, 2006.Muravchik, Joshua, and Stephen M. Walt. ‘The neocons vs. the Realists.’

The National Interest, 9 March 2008. http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=19672 (accessed 23 May 2012).

References 199

Murray, A. J. H. ‘The moral politics of Hans Morgenthau.’ The Review of Politics58, no. 1 (Winter 1996): 81–107.

Nardin, Terry. Law, Morality and the Relations of States. Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press, 1983.

———‘Ethical Traditions.’ In Traditions of International Ethics. Edited by TerryNardin and David R. Mapel, 1–22. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1992.

Nardin, Terry and David R. Mapel, eds. Traditions of International Ethics.Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Navari, Cornelia, ed. Theorising International Society: English School Methods.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

Neumann, Iver B. ‘The English School on diplomacy.’ In Diplomacy. Editedby Christer Jönsson and Richard Langhorne, 92–116 1. Thousand Oaks, CA:SAGE Publications, 2004.

Nicholson, Martin. ‘The enigma of Martin Wight.’ Review of InternationalStudies 7 (1981): 15–22.

Niebuhr, Reinhold. ‘Why the Christian church is not pacifist.’ In The EssentialReinhold Niebuhr: Selected Essays and Addresses. Edited by Robert M. Brown,102–19. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1986.

Niehbuhr, Reinhold. Christianity and Power Politics. New York: CharlesScribner’s Sons, 1940.

———The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness: A Vindication of Democ-racy and a Critique of its Traditional Defense. New York: Charles Scribner’sSons, 1944.

———Christian Realism and Political Problems. New York: Scribner, 1953.———Christian Realism and Political Problems. Fairfield: Augustus M. Kelley

Publishers, 1977.———Moral Man and Immoral Society. New York: Continuum, 2005.Norris, Andrew. ‘Us’ and “them”: The politics of American self-assertion after

9/11.’ Metaphilosophy 35, no. 3 (2004): 249–272.Norris, Pippa, and Ronald Ingelhart. Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics

Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.Nye, Joseph S. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York:

Public Affairs, 2004.———‘Get Smart: Combining hard and soft power.’ Foreign Affairs,

July/August 2009.Office of the Press Secretary of the White House. ‘President Addresses Nation,

Discusses Iraq, War on Terror.’ http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050628-7.html (accessed 23 May 2012).

Ogley, Roderick C. ‘International relations: Poetry, prescription or science?’Millennium – Journal of International Studies 10, no. 2 (1981): 170–186.

Onuf, Nicholas G. World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory andInternational Relations. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press,1989.

———‘Institutions, intentions and international relations.’ Review of Interna-tional Studies 28, no. 2 (2002): 211–228.

200 References

Osiander, Andreas. ‘Religion and politics in western civilisation: The ancientworld as matrix and mirror of the modern!’ Millennium – Journal of Interna-tional Studies 29, no. 3 (2000): 761–790.

Otis, Pauletta. ‘Religion and war in the twenty-first century.’ In Religion andSecurity: The new Nexus in International Relations. Edited by Robert A. Seipleand Dennis R. Hoover, 11–24. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers,2004.

Otto, Rudolph. The Idea of the Holy. London: Oxford University Press, 1923.Palaver, Wolfgang. ‘Hobbes and the Katéchon: The secularization of sacrificial

Christianity.’ Contagion: Journal of Violence, Mimesis, and Culture 2 (Spring1995): 57–74.

———‘Order out of chaos in the theories of Carl Schmitt and René Girard.’Synthesis 1, no. 1 (Spring 1995): 87–106.

———‘Envy or emulation: A Christian understanding of economic passions.’In Passions in Economy, Politics, and the Media: In Discussion with ChristianTheology. Edited by Wolfgang Palaver and Petra Steinmair-Pösel, 139–62.Münster: LIT, 2005.

———‘Carl Schmitt’s “Apocalyptic” resistance against global civil war.’ In Pol-itics and Apocalypse. Edited by Robert Hamerton-Kelley, 69–94. MorillHall: Michigan State University Press, 2007.

———‘René Girard‘s Contribution to Political Theology: Overcoming Dead-locks of Competition and Enmity.’ In Between Philosophy and Theology: Con-temporary Interpretations of Christianity. Edited by L. Boeve and ChristopheBrabant, 149–65. Burlington VT: Ashgate Pub., 2010.

Palaver, Wolfgang and Petra Steinmair-Pösel, eds. Passions in Economy, Politics,and the Media: In Discussion with Christian Theology. Münster: LIT, 2005.

Palaver, Wolfgang, Roman Siebenrock, and Dietmar Regensburger, eds.Westliche Moderne, Christentum und Islam. Gewalt als Anfrage an monotheis-tische Religionen. Innsbruck: Innsbruck University Press, 2008.

Pape, Robert A. Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. New York:Random House, 2005.

Parent, Joseph M., and Joshua M. Baron. ‘Elder abuse: How the mod-erns mistreat classical Realism.’ International Studies Review 13 (2011):193–213.

Patrick, Stewart. Weak Links: Fragile States, Global Threats, and InternationalSecurity. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Philpott, Daniel. Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas shaped Modern Interna-tional Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.

———‘The Catholic wave.’ Journal of Democracy 15, no. 2 (2004): 32–46.———‘Explaining the political ambivalence of religion.’ American Political

Science Review 101, no. 3 (August 2007): 505–525.Plato. The Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Edited by

G.R.F. Ferraris. Translated by T. Griffith.Pogge, Thomas W. ‘Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty.’ In Political Recon-

structing in Europe: Ethical Perspectives. Edited by Chris Brown, 89–122.London: Routledge, 1994.

References 201

Posen, Barry R. ‘The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict.’ Survival 35, no. 1(Spring 1993): 27–47.

Post, Jerrold M., Farhana Ali, Schuyler W. Henderson, Stephen Shanfield,Jeff Victoroff, and Stevan Weine. ‘The psychology of suicide terrorism.’Psychiatry 72, no. 1 (Spring 2009): 13–31.

Powell, Elinor. The Heart of Conflict: A Spirituality of Transformation. Kelowa,BC: Northstone Publishing, 2003.

Price, Richard, and Christian Reus-Smit. ‘Dangerous liaisons? Critical inter-national theory and Constructivism.’ The European Journal of InternationalRelations 4, no. 3 (1998): 259–294.

Rapoport, David C. ‘The fourth wave: September 22 in the history of terror-ism.’ Current History, December 2001, 419–424.

Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press, 2005.———Political Liberalism. Exp. ed. New York et al.: Columbia University Press,

2005.Rees, John A. ‘ “Really Existing” Scriptures: On the Use of Sacred Text in Inter-

national Affairs.’ The Brandywine Review of Faith and International Affairs 2,no. 1 (Spring 2004): 17–26.

Reus-Smit, Christian. ‘Imagining society: Constructivism and the EnglishSchool.’ British Journal of Politics and International Relations 4, no. 3 (October2002): 487–509.

Reuter, Astrid. ‘Sekularität und Religionsfreiheit: Ein doppeltes Dillemma.’Leviathan 35, no. 2 (Juni 2007): 178–192.

Rifkin, Ira. Spiritual Perspectives on Globalization: Making sense of Economic andCultural Upheaval. 2nd ed. Woodstock VT: Skylight Paths Pub., 2004.

Rose, Gideon. ‘Neoclassical Realism and theories of foreign policy.’ WorldPolitics 51 (October 1998): 144–172; Review Article.

Rosenau, James N. Linkage Politics. New York: Free Press, 1969.Ross, Dennis. Statecraft: And How to Restore America’s Standing in the World.

New York: Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2007.Roy, Olivier. Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah. New York, NY:

Columbia University Press, 2004.———‘Why do they hate us? Not because of Iraq.’ The New York Times,

July 22, 2005. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/22/opinion/22roy.html?_r=2 (accessed 23 May 2012).

———Holy Ignorance: When Religion and Culture part Ways. New York:Columbia University Press, 2010.

———‘Révolution post-islamiste.’ LeMonde, February 12, 2011. http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2011/02/12/revolution-post-islamiste_1478858_3232.html (accessed 23 May 2012).

Rudolph, Susann H. ‘Dehomogenizing religious formations.’ In TransnationalReligion and Fading States. Edited by Susann H. Rudolph, 243–61. Boulder,CO: Westview Press, 1997.

———‘Introduction: Religion, states, and transnational civil society.’In Transnational Religion and Fading States. Edited by Susann H. Rudolph,1–24. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997.

202 References

———‘Religious transnationalism.’ In Religion in Global Civil Society. Edited byMark Juergensmeyer, 189–200. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

———, ed. Transnational Religion and Fading States. Boulder, CO: WestviewPress, 1997.

Ryall, David. ‘How many divisions? The modern development of Catholicinternational relations.’ International Relations 14, no. 2 (August 1998):21–34.

Sandal, Nukhet A., and Patrick James. ‘Religion and international relationstheory: Towards a mutual understanding.’ European Journal of InternationalRelations, OnlineFirst, published on July 27 (2010).

Schall, James. At the Limits of Political Philosophy: From ‘Brilliant Errors’ toThings of Uncommon Importance. Washington D.C.: The Catholic Universityof America Press, 1996.

Scheuerman, William E. ‘Another hidden dialogue: Hans Morgenthau andCarl Schmitt.’ In Carl Schmitt: The End of Law. Edited by WilliamE. Scheuerman, 225–51. New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999.

———‘Was Morgenthau a Realist? Revisiting Scientific Man vs. Power Politics.’Constellations 14, no. 4 (2007): 506–530.

———‘Realism and the Left: The case of Hans J. Morgenthau.’ Review ofInternational Studies 34 (2008): 29–51.

———‘The (classical) Realist vision of global reform.’ International Theory 2,no. 2 (2010): 246–282.

———The Realist Case for Global Reform. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2011.———, ed. Carl Schmitt: The End of Law. New York: Rowman and Littlefield,

1999.Schieder, Rolf. ‘Zivilreligionen als Friedensstifter?’ In Friedensstiftende

Religionen? Religion und die Deeskalation politischer Konflikte. Edited byManfred Brocker and Mathias Hildebrandt, 123–37. Wiesbaden: VS Verlagfür Sozialwissenschaften, 2008.

Schlesinger, Athur, JR., and Martin E. Marty. ‘Bush’s righteous empire.’ NewPerspectives Quarterly 22, no. 1 (Winter 2005): 20–24.

Schmidt, Brian C. The Political Discourse of Anarchy: A Disciplinary History ofInternational Relations. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1998.

———‘The Rockefeller Foundation Conference and the long Road to a Theoryof International Politics.’ In The Invention of International Relations The-ory: Realism, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory.Edited by Nicolas Guilhot, 79–96. New York: Columbia University Press,2011.

Schmitt, Carl. Ex Captivitate Salus: Erfahrungen aus der Zeit 1945/47. Köln:Greven Verlag, 1950.

———‘The age of neutralizations and depoliticizations.’ Telos 96 (1993):119–130; Trans. John P. McCormick and Matthias Konzett.

———Politische Theologie II: Die Legende von der Erledigung jeder PolitischenTheologie. 4th ed. Berlin: Duncker and Humblot, 1996.

———The Concept of the Political. Chicago Ill.: University of Chicago Press,1996.

References 203

———Der Begriff des Politischen. 2nd ed. Berlin: Duncker and Humbolt, 2002.Text von 1932 mit einem Vorwort und drei Corollarien.

———Politische Theologie: Vier Kapitel zur Lehre von der Souveränität. 8th ed.Berlin: Duncker and Humblot, 2004.

Schouenborg, Laust. ‘A New Institutionalism? The English School as Inter-national Sociological Theory.’ International Relations 25, no. 1 (2011):26–44.

Schuett, Robert. Political Realism, Freud, and Human Nature in International Rela-tions: The Resurrection of the Realist Man. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,2009.

Schwager, Raymund. Jesus im Heilsdrama: Entwurf einer biblischenErlösungslehre. 2nd ed. Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1996.

Schwartz, Regina. The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1997.

Scott, James C. Seeing like a State: How certain Schemes to Improve the HumanCondition Have Failed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998.

Scowcroft, Brent. ‘Don’t attack Saddam.’ Wall Street Journal, August 15, 2002.Scruton, Roger. The West and the Rest: Globalization and the Terrorist Threat.

Wilmington, Del.: ISI Books, 2002.Searle, Austin. Sprechakte: Ein sprachphilosophischer Essay. 9th ed. Frankfurt

a.M.: Suhrkamp, 2000.Seiple, Robert A. and Dennis R. Hoover, eds. Religion and Security: The new

Nexus in International Relations. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers,2004.

Sen, Amartya K. Identity and Violence. New York NY: Norton, 2006.Senghaas, Dieter. Zivilisierung wider Willen: Der Konflikt der Kulturen mit sich

Selbst. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1998.Sewell, Keith C. Herbert Butterfield and the Interpretation of History. Basingstoke:

Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.Sha-Kazemi, Reza. The Other in the Light of the One: Universality of the Qur’an

and Interfaith Dialogue. Cambridge: The Islamic Texts Society, 2006.Sharp, Paul. ‘Herbert Butterfield, the English School and the civilizing virtues

of diplomacy.’ International Affairs 9, no. 4 (2003): 855–878.———Diplomatic Theory of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 2009.Sharp, Paul and Geoffrey Wiseman, eds. The Diplomatic Corps as an Institution

of International Society. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.Sjolander, Claire T. and Wayne S. Cox, eds. Beyond Positivism: Critical Reflec-

tions on International Relations. Boulder, CO; London: Westview Press,1994.

Smith, Warren. ‘Augustine and the limits of preemptive and preventive war.’Journal of Religious Ethics 35, no. 1 (2007): 141–162.

Smith, William. ‘Anticipating a cosmopolitan future: The case of humanitar-ian military intervention.’ International Politics 44 (2007): 72–89.

Snyder, Jack L., ed. Religion and International Relations Theory. New York:Columbia University Press, 2011.

204 References

Snyder, Lewis W. Growth, Debt, and Politics: Economic Adjustment and thePolitical Performance of Developing Countries. Boulder: Westview Press, 1996.

Sofsky, Wolfgang. ‘Kehren wir zurück in normale, historisch, gefährlicheZeiten.’ Süddeutsche Zeitung, August 24, 2006. 194.

Sorensen, Georg. ‘What Kind of World Order? The international system in thenew millennium.’ Cooperation and Conflict 41, no. 4 (2006): 343–363.

Soysa, Indra, and Ragnhild Nordas. ‘Islam’s bloody innards? Religion andpolitical terror, 1980–2000.’ International Studies Quarterly 51 (2007):927–943.

Srinivas, Tulasi. Winged Faith: Rethinking Globalization and Religious PluralismThrough the Sathya Sai Movement. New York: Columbia University Press,2010.

Stark, Rodney. One true God: Historical Consequences of Monotheism. Princeton:Princeton University Press, 2001.

Stepan, Alfred. ‘Religion, democracy, and the “twin tolerations”.’ Journal ofDemocracy 11, no. 4 (October 2000): 37–57.

Stepan, Alfred, and Graeme B. Robertson. ‘An “Arab” more than a “Muslim”democracy gap.’ Journal of Democracy 14 (July 2003): 30–44.

Stern, Jessica. ‘Beneath bombast and bombs, a cauldron of humiliation.’ LosAngeles Times, June 6, 2004.

Stolpe, Seven. Dag Hammarskjöld: A Spiritual Portrait. New York: CharlesScribner’s Sons, 1966.

Stone, Ronald H. Christian Realism and Peacemaking: Issues in U.S. Foreign Policy.Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1988.

———Prophetic Realism: Beyond Militarism and Pacifism in an Age of Terror.New York: T and T Clark, 2005.

Suganami, Hidemi. ‘Alexander Wendt and the English School.’ Journal ofInternational Relations and Development 4, no. 4 (December 2001): 403–423.

Sylvest, Casper. ‘John H. Herz and the Resurrection of Classical Realism.’International Relations 22, no. 4 (2008): 441–455.

Taliaferro, Jeffrey W., Steven E. Lobell, and Norrin M. Ripsman. ‘Introduction:Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy.’ In Neoclassical Realism,the State, and Foreign Policy. Edited by Steven E. Lobell, Norrin M. Ripsmanand Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, 1–41. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge UniversityPress, 2009.

Taylor, Charles. A Secular Age. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of HarvardUniversity Press, 2007.

The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. ‘Spirit and Power: A 10-CountrySurvey of Pentecostals.’ Poll. http://pewforum.org/Christian/Evangelical-Protestant-Churches/Spirit-and-Power.aspx.

———‘U.S. Religious Landscape Survey: Religious Beliefs and Practices:Diverse and Politically Relevant.’ http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report2-religious-landscape-study-full.pdf.

Thomas, Scott M. ‘Religious Resurgence, Postmodernism, and World Politics.’In Religion and Global Order. Edited by John L. a. M. W. Esposito, 38–65.Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2000.

References 205

———‘Taking Religious and Cultural Pluralism Seriously: The Global Resur-gence of Religion and the Transformation of International Society.’ Millen-nium 29, no. 3 (2000): 815–841.

———Faith, History and Martin Wight: The Role of Religion in the Histori-cal Sociology of the English School of International Relations.’ InternationalAffairs 77, no. 4 (2001): 905–929.

———‘Building Communities of Character: Foreign Aid Policy and Faith-Based Organizations.’ SAIS Review XXIV, no. 2 (Summer/Fall 2004):133–148.

———The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation of InternationalRelations: The Struggle for the Soul of the Twenty-first Century. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.

———‘Outwitting the Developed Countries? Existential Insecurity and theGlobal Resurgence of Religion.’ Journal of International Affairs 61, no. 1(Fall/Winter 2007): 21–45.

———‘Living Critically and ‘Living Faithfully’ in a Global Age: Justice, Eman-cipation and the Political Theology of International Relations.’ Millennium –Journal of International Studies 39, no. 2 (2010): 505–524.

———‘A Globalized God: Religion’s Growing Influence in International Poli-tics.’ Foreign Affairs 89, no. 6 (November/December 2010): 93–101.

Thompson, Kenneth W. Christian Ethics and the Dilemmas of Foreign Policy.Durham NC: Duke University Press, 1959.

Tibi, Bassam. Islamischer Fundamentalismus, moderne Wissenschaft undTechnologie. 2nd ed. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1993.

———Krieg der Zivilisationen: Politik und Religion zwischen Vernunft undFundamentalismus. Hamburg: Hoffmann und Kampe, 1995.

———Kreuzzug und Djihad. MünchenI: Bertelsmann Verlag, 1999.———Die neue Weltunordnung: Westliche Dominanz und islamischer

Fundamentalismus. 2nd ed. München: Econ Ullstein, 2001.———Islam between Culture and Politics. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan, 2005.Tilly, Charles. Collective Violence. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University

Press, 2003.Tishkov, Valery. Ethnicity, Nationalism and Conflicts in and after the Soviet Union:

The Mind Aflame. London: Sage, 1997.Toft, Monica D. ‘Religion, Rationality, and Violence.’ In Religion and

International Relations Theory. Edited by Jack L. Snyder, 115–40.New York: Columbia University Press, 2011.

Toft, Monica D., Daniel Philpott, and Timothy S. Shah. God’s Century:Resurgent Religion and Global Politics. New York: W.W. Norton, 2011.

Tönnis, Ferdinand. Community and Civil Society. Cambridge, New York:Cambridge University Press, 2001. Ed. Jose Harris, translated by Jose Harrisand Margaret Hollis.

Tudor, Henry. Political Myth. London: Pall Mall Press, 1972.Urquhart, Brian. ‘The Secretary-General: Why Dag Hammarskjöld.’ In The

Adventure of Peace: Dag Hammarskjöld and the Future of the UN. Edited by Sten

206 References

Ask and Anna Mark–Jungkoist, 14–23. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,2005.

van Dusen, Henry P. Dag Hammarskjöld: The Statesman and his Faith. New York,Evanston and London: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1964.

Vaughan–Williams, Nick. ‘Beyond a cosmopolitan ideal: The politics ofsingularity.’ International Politics 44 (2007): 107–124.

Vincent, R. J. Non–intervention and International Order. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1974.

———‘Western conceptions of a universal moral order.’ British Journal ofInternational Studies 4, no. 1 (1978): 20–46.

———Human Rights and International Relations: Issues and Responses.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Viroli, Maurizio. ‘Machiavelli’s Realism.’ Constellations 14, no. 4 (2007):466–482.

Voegelin, Eric. Political Religions. Lewiston, NY: E. Mellen Press, 1986.Volf, Miroslav. Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity,

Otherness, and Reconciliation. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1996.Vries, Hent de, ed. Public Religions Revisited. New York: Fordham University

Press, 2008.Walsh, Caroline. ‘Rawls and Walzer on non-domestic justice.’ Contemporary

Political Theory 6 (2007): 419–436.Walt, Stephen M. ‘One world, many theories.’ Foreign Policy 110 (Spring 1998):

29–44.Walter, Peter, ed. Das Gewaltpotential des Monotheismus und der dreieine Gott.

Freiburg i.Br.: Herder, 2005.Waltz, Kenneth. Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York:

Columbia University Press, 2001.Waltz, Kenneth N. Theory of International Politics. Reading: McGraw-Hill, 1979.Walzer, Michael. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality.

New York: Basic Books, 1983.———Thick and Thin: A Moral Argument at Home and Abroad. Notre Dame Ind.:

University of Notre Dame Press, 1994.———Lokale Kritik – globale Standards: Zwei Formen moralischer

Auseinandersetzung. Hamburg: Rotbuch Verlag, 1996.———Arguing about War. New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 2005.———Thinking Politically: Essays in Political Theory. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press, 2007. Selected, edited, and with an introduction byD. Miller.

Wapner, Paul. ‘Politics beyond the state: Environmental activism and worldcivic politics.’ World Politics 47 (April 1995): 311–340.

Watson, Adam. The Evolution of International Society: A Comparative HistoricalAnalysis. London: Routledge, 1992.

Weber, Max. Politik als Beruf. Stuttgart: Reclam, 2004.Webster, Alexander F. C., and Darrell Cole. The Virtue of War: Reclaiming the

Classic Christian Traditions East and West. Salisbury, MA: Regina OrthodoxPress Inc., 2004.

References 207

Weigel, George. Faith, Reason, and the War against Jihadism: A Call to Action.New York: Doubleday, 2007.

Weinstein, Jack R. On MacIntyre. London: Wadsworth, 2003.Wellmann, James K., JR., and Kyoko Tokuno. ‘Is religious violence inevitable?’

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 43, no. 2 (2004): 291–296.Wendt, Alexander. ‘Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construc-

tion of power politics.’ International Organization 42, no. 2 (Spring 1992):391–425.

———Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1999.

———Social Theory of International Politics. 11th printing, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Wenman, Mark. ‘William E. Connolly: Pluralism without transcendence.’BJPIR 10 (2008): 156–170.

Wheeler, Nicholas. Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in InternationalSociety. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Wight, Martin. ‘Christian pacifism.’ Theology 33, no. 193 (July 1936): 12–21.———‘Why is there no international theory?’ In Diplomatic Investiga-

tions: Essays in the Theory of International Politics. Edited by HerbertButterfield and Martin Wight, 17–34. London: Allen and Unwin, 1966.

———International Theory: The Three Traditions. Leicester: Leicester UniversityPress, 1991.

———Systems of States. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1997.Williams, John. ‘Pluralism, solidarism and the emergence of world society in

English School theory.’ International Relations 19, no. 1 (2005): 19–38.———‘Hedley Bull and Just War: Missed opportunities and lessons to be

learned.’ European Journal of International Relations 16, no. 2 (2010):179–196.

Williams, Michael C. The Realist Tradition and the Limits of InternationalRelations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

———‘Morgenthau now: Neoconservatism, national greatness, and Realism.’In Realism Reconsidered: The Legacy of Hans Morgenthau in International Rela-tions. Edited by Michael C. Williams, 216–40. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, 2007.

———, ed. Realism Reconsidered: The Legacy of Hans Morgenthau in InternationalRelations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Wilson, Peter. ‘The myth of the “First Great Debate!”.’ Review of InternationalStudies 24 (1998): 1–16.

World Society Research Group. ‘Introduction: World society.’ In CivilizingWorld Politics: Society and Community Beyond the State. Edited by MathiasAlbert, Lothar Brock and Klaus D. Wolf, 1–17. Frankfurt a.M.: Rowman andLittlefield, 2000.

Wuthnow, Robert. ‘Understanding religion and politics.’ Daedalus 120, no. 3(Summer 1991): 1–20.

Young, Antonia. ‘Religion and society in present-day Albania.’ Journal ofContemporary Religion 14, no. 1 (January 1999): 5–16.

208 References

Zakaria, Fareed. The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad.New York and London: W.W. Norton, 2004.

———The Post-American World: Release 2.0. Updated and Expanded. New Yorkand London: W.W. Norton, 2011. Updated and Expanded.

Zambernardi, Lorenzo. ‘The impotence of power: Morgenthau’s Critique ofAmerican Intervention in Vietnam.’ Review of International Studies 37, no. 3(2011): 1335–1356.

Zizek, Slavoj. ‘Holding the place.’ In Contingency, Hegemony, Universality-Contemporary Dialogues of the Left,. Edited by Judith Butler, Ernesto Laclauand Slavoj Zizek, 315–6. London: Verso, 2000.

Index

20th-century Realism 7–17, 49, 73,83, 104

absolutism 35, 61aesthesia 21Age of Neutralization (theory)

32–3, 119, 126Agnew, John 101Al-Qaeda 47, 70, 77, 119Albright, Madeleine 6–7Ambrose, St 112Appleby, Scott 21, 39–40Aquinas, St Thomas 72–3, 105Arab Spring 12, 28Arendt, Hannah 5, 73, 99Aristotle 35, 72–4, 112, 139Aron, Raymond 107Assmann, Jan 34atheism 5Atran, Scott 77Augustine, St 86, 104–7, 112–13,

116

Barber, Benjamin 126bargaining theory 40Berger, Peter 30–31, 42, 124,

139The Bible 34, 59–61, 97

New Testament 3, 109Old Testament 98, 114

Bin Laden, Osama 70Bonhoeffer, Dietrich 110, 142British International Relations

Committee 66see also English School

Buddhism 31, 83, 140Bull, Hedley 8, 18, 45, 86, 92, 99,

102and Watson, Adam 88

Bush administration 36Butterfield, Herbert 46, 57, 86–7,

90–91, 114–17Buzan, Barry 92, 94–5

Carr, Edward H. 4, 7, 13–14, 19Casanova, José 141Catholicism 74–5, 86, 140

see also Roman Catholic ChurchCavanaugh, William 14Christian ethics 5, 10, 33,

116Christian Realism 18, 33, 86,

103–19Churchill, Winston 3–4, 144civil religion 20civil society 43–4

definition 43clash of civilizations theory

(Huntington) 44–5, 48Classical Realism 14, 23, 62, 119,

142Cold War 7, 20, 29, 37, 69, 94–5,

126common humanity principle 32,

125communism 43communitarianism 74, 82, 85, 98,

142Concept of the Political (Schmitt) 48conduct:

human 11–12social 9

conflict paradigm 21conflict resolution 6conflicts:

religious 23–4Constructivism 18–19, 31, 36–42,

65–8, 79–85, 86–91, 142

209

210 Index

cosmopolitanism 16, 44, 89–90,96–100, 117

covenant:global 31

Cox, Harvey 30critical theory 39

Davos Men 89Decalogue (Ten Commandments)

58–60, 143democracy 21, 29–31, 124, 141deterritorialization 41differentiation concept (Philpott)

40definition 40

Dignitatis Humanae (Second VaticanCouncil) 25

diplomacy 8, 92, 94faith-based 41, 43, 131

discursivation theory 56diversity 99–102dogmatism 22, 56, 113, 131Dostoyevsky, Fyodor 4–5, 110dualism 22–3, 127Duffy Toft, Monica 40

Philpott, Daniel and Shah,Timothy Samuel 30, 84

Durkheim, Émile 54Dying to Win (Pape) 77dynamism:

religious 31

English School 7–17, 65–7, 123–38theory of international relations

86–102Enlightenment 18, 20–21, 45, 69,

71–2ethical realism

see Christian RealismEthical Realism (Lieven and

Hulsman) 107ethical relativism 14, 130ethics: see

Christian ethicsvirtue ethics

European Union 88

evangelical Christianity 11, 140–41evangelical Protestantism 31

exclusivism 57extremism:

Islamic 40, 94religious 7, 41, 49–51, 79, 83, 95

faith-based diplomacy 41, 43, 131,134–6, 142

fanaticism 28Frankel, Charles 130freedom:

religious 24–6Freud, Sigmund 10friend–foe distinction 9, 37, 48Fukuyama, Francis 57, 125Fuller, Graham 37fundamentalism 20, 22–4, 68

religious 6, 70

Geertz, Clifford 53–4Gellner, Ernst 43Girard, René 9, 39, 46, 48, 58–60,

111, 119, 127global covenant 31global governance 49–50, 99global politics 16–17, 19, 25,

27–52, 123–44globalization 11–12, 25, 42, 97Globalized Islam (Roy) 41Gopin, Marc 41governance:

political 21Guilhot, Nicolas 15, 114Gurr, Ted Robert 37Gutiérrez, Gustavo 75

Habermas, Jürgen 60Halliday, Fred 44Hamas 47Hammarskjöld, Dag 5, 18, 34,

61–2, 105, 136–9Hanson, Eric 25Hasenclever, Andreas:

and Rittberger, Volker 36, 38Hauerwas, Stanley 78, 118

Index 211

Haynes, Jeffrey 29, 39, 43Hertz, John 13Hezbollah 77Hinduism 31, 140Hobbes, Thomas 7, 46, 51, 60, 89,

110, 142Holy See 43, 101–2, 132–4Holy War, Holy Peace (Gopin) 41Hulsman, John:

and Lieven, Anatol 107–8human conduct 11–12, 125Huntington, Samuel 20, 37, 44–6,

83, 88–9, 125

idealism 14, 32, 65, 84, 86, 88,106

Wilsonian 13ideologization 53, 57, 62Imagine (Lennon) 4, 6inclusivism 57individualism 68–9Ingelhart, Ronald:

and Norris, Pippa 27–8instrumentalism 36–42International Political Theory (IPT)

(Kubálková) 67, 80, 142international relations theory 33,

65, 95, 97, 104, 123–4international society concept

87–102, 128, 144definition 88

Iranian Revolution 11, 29, 45–7,103

Irish Republican Army (IRA) 76–7Islam 28, 41Islamic extremism 40, 94Israel/Palestine conflict 29, 47

Jackson, Robert 31–2, 89, 124–5Jefferson, Thomas 24–5Jihadism 40–41, 77John Paul II, Pope 25, 59, 107, 133Jonas, Hans 73Judaism 30–31Judeo-Christian values 6, 103, 105,

110

Juergensmeyer, Mark 23, 30, 39,46, 50

Just War theory 86, 112–13

Kant, Immanuel 73, 87, 89–90Kaplan, Robert 45–6Karamazov, Ivan 5katéchon 103, 109–10, 142Kennan, George F. 7, 15, 99, 105Keohane, Robert 20, 70Kepel, Gilles 37, 88The Koran 41Kubálková, Vendulka 67, 79–81, 84

laicism 30Lausten, Bagge:

and Waever, Ole 56Laval, Pierre 3Lennon, John 4, 6Leustean, Lucian 54Lewis, Bernhard 46liberal Realism 13liberalism 35, 45, 65, 86, 88

neoliberalism 66–9anti-liberalism 36

Lieven, Anatol:and Hulsman, John 107–8

Lincoln, Abraham 4Linklater, Andrew 98Lovin, Robert 118Lynch, Cecelia 106

MacIntyre, Alasdair 65, 67, 72–9,85, 98, 127–9

Markings (Hammarskjöld) 62, 138martyrs 62Marxism 9, 43Mead, Walter R. 67–8Mearsheimer, John 8, 36mediation 56metaphysics 31, 72, 81–2, 85Miami Group 65, 67, 80–81mimesis 53, 58–60, 138mimetic rivalry theory 46–7,

58–60, 62, 111modernization 3, 15, 141

212 Index

modernization theory 31, 70modus vivendi (way of living) 125monism 14, 130monotheism 17, 22, 34, 45–7,

126–7moral relativism 125moralism 32, 34–5Morgenthau, Hans J. 7–19, 21,

32–3, 55–6, 110–11, 117–19,142–3

Mouffe, Chantal 143multilateralism 49, 95, 101mysticism 4, 53

Nardin, Terry 106narrative theory 65, 67, 71–6, 79,

128nationalism:

political 109religious 23, 93secularized 14, 30, 47

neoclassical Realism 8, 14neoconservatism 35, 113, 119neoliberalism 66–9new world order theory 44–5, 50Niebuhr, Reinhold 7, 14, 21, 35,

105–6, 109nihilism 36, 45, 78, 130non-governmental organizations

(NGOs) 83, 89non-intervention principle 37,

48, 91Norris, Pippa:

and Ingelhart, Ronald 27–8

original sin doctrine 35, 105, 116,138

Otis, Pauletta 35Otto, Rudolf 22

pacifism 4–5, 33, 105, 116Pape, Robert 77paradigm:

conflict 21stabilizing 21

particularism 57

Patrick, Stewart 49Paul, St 61patriotism 107peace-building 6, 33, 51, 89, 118,

134Pentecostalism 31Philpott, Daniel 39–40

Duffy Toft, Monica and Shah,Timothy Samuel 30, 84

Plato 72–3pluralism 14, 31–2, 87–92, 125,

129–30religious 15

political governance 21political nationalism 109political Realism 21, 55, 115political religion 20–22, 54political theology 14, 22, 115politics:

global 16–17, 19, 25, 27–52,123–44

polytheism 46the Pope 3, 137Pope John Paul II 25, 59, 107,

133Posen, Barry 25positivism 11, 80, 103, 117, 143power politics 37, 48Primordialism 36–42, 88privatization 4Protestantism:

evangelical 31

Quakers 4–5, 33, 118, 135

rationalism 12, 66Rawls, John 38, 72–4Realism 7–17, 18, 19, 86

20th-century 7–17, 49, 73, 83,104

Christian 18, 33, 86, 103–19Classical 14, 23, 62, 119, 142liberal 13Neo-Realism

14, 25, 48, 66–9, 77, 96neoclassical 8, 14

Index 213

political 21, 55, 115Structural 24

Realpolitik 3, 13, 19, 32, 104, 119relativism 14, 66

ethical 14, 130moral 125

religion:civil 20political 20–22, 54

religiosity 28, 33, 60, 102religious conflicts 23–4religious dynamism 31religious extremism 7, 41, 49–51,

79, 83, 95religious freedom 24–6religious fundamentalism 6religious movements 29religious nationalism 23religious pluralism 15‘religiously musical’ (Weber) 4–5,

86, 102revolutionism 87, 89–90, 135Revolutions in Sovereignty (Philpott)

39–40Rittberger, Volker:

and Hasenclever, Andreas 36, 38Rockefeller Foundation 66, 114–15Roman Catholic Church 43, 81, 83,

101, 107, 116holiness of life 132–6

Roy, Olivier 11

the sacred: see theocracysacrifice 4–5Scheuerman, William 14Schmitt, Carl 9, 32–3, 45–8, 81, 83,

94–5, 109Scientific Man vs. Power Politics

(Morgenthau) 32–3scientism 66, 114

Western 32Scientology 76Scott, James 69Second World War 29, 114

the secularsecular age 139secular theology 14secularism 15–16, 20, 46, 119,

124, 141–3secularization 3, 15, 27, 119,

124, 140–41secularized nationalism 14,

30, 47see also democracy

Sen, Amartya 12, 75Senghaas, Dieter 37September 11th attacks 36–7, 42,

44, 46–7, 49–50, 94–5Shah, Timothy Samuel:

Philpott, Daniel and Duffy Toft,Monica 30, 83

Shah-Kazemi, Reza 41Shakman Hurd, Elizabeth 16, 28Sharia law 82Sharp, Paul 101social conduct 9social science 9–11, 18, 34, 53, 79,

101, 124social-scientific theory 5, 26sociology 3soft power 42–3, 67, 70, 97

definition 42solidarism 16, 87–102, 129sovereignty 8, 92–4, 101, 117, 119stabilizing paradigm 21Stalin, Joseph 3–4statecraft 51–2, 104, 112Stepan, Alfred 24, 141Structural Realism 24suicide terrorism 40, 69, 73, 76–9,

84–5, 130

Taylor, Charles 73, 139Ten Commandments (Decalogue)

58–60, 143territoriality 92–4, 101–2terrorism 23–4, 70

suicide 40, 69, 73, 76–9, 84–5,130

see also war on terror

214 Index

theocracy 21, 25, 30–31, 93theology:

political 14, 22, 115secular 14

Theory of Justice (Rawls) 72Third World 29–30Thomas Aquinas, St 72–3, 105Thomas, Scott 15, 28–9, 39Thompson, Kenneth 115Tibi, Bassam 37, 82, 88Tönnis, Ferdinand 87–8tradition-dependent rationality 71,

77–9, 85, 127–8, 130trans-national advocacy networks

(TANs) 42, 97transcendentalism 21–2, 56, 62,

123, 126tribalism 24Twenty Years’ Crisis (Carr) 4–5

United Nations (UN) 93, 136–7see also Hammarskjöld, Dag

universalism 57, 83, 127utilitarianism 58–9, 143

Vatican Council, Second 25, 132via media 86, 88, 128Vietnam War 11, 70, 103Vincent, R.J. 90virtue ethics 18, 65, 71–4, 79,

85, 91definition 73

vita activa 5vita contemplativa 5

Voegelin, Eric 20, 46, 54, 61Volf, Miroslav 61

Waever, Ole:and Lausten, Bagge 56

Waltz, Kenneth 8, 23, 68, 96Walzer, Michael 22, 55, 97–8, 112,

125, 142war on terror 20, 36, 42, 44, 50–51,

94–5, 98Watson, Adam:

and Bull, Hedley 88and Wight, Martin 95

Weber, Max 4, 12, 17, 47, 73, 102‘religiously musical’ 4–5, 86,

102Weigel, George 142Wendt, Alexander 91Western scientism 32Wight, Martin 8, 51, 86–8, 102,

124, 140, 144and Watson, Adam 95

Wilsonian Idealism 13World Council of Churches (WCC)

83, 93, 119world order 15

definition 15world society concept 87–102, 128,

133, 144definition 92

Wuthnow, Robert 15, 18, 31

Zakaria, Fareed 8, 109