Chair: Dr. Sasikumar Sundaram (City, University of London, UK)

Abstract: Global Disorder is the biggest problem of international politics. Wars, disruptive technologies, transformation of the rule of law, climate change, economic slowdown, and discontentment with multinational corporations, along with the rise of authoritarianism on the one hand and militant democracies on the other, have shown that “disorder” is the new conceptual vocabulary in International Politics, Sociology, and Political Economy. This academic conceptual vocabulary is still unclear in its semantic field; yet, when practitioners and pundits wield this idea in their rhetoric, it creates tremendous political consequences. The purpose of the section is to develop new international interdisciplinary conversations to further our understanding of global disorder. The section aims to understand the workings of power in the narratives of ordering and disordering by examining several interconnected questions. How does the rhetoric of disorder function within liberal internationalism, mobilizing some policy options and rejecting others? It examines how disruptive technologies are connected to global disordering. The section also studies different relational methodologies to study disorder through the mapping of a global knowledge network. Crucially, the section also how the rise of the Global South alongside renewed debates on postcolonial and decolonial thinking has engendered polarized debates on Global Disorder. The objective of the section is to have an interdisciplinary conversations on different relational aspects of Global Disorder.

Chair: Arta Haxhixhemajli (German Marshall Fund of the United States, Kosovo)

Abstract: In today’s evolving global landscape, we must understand the intricacies of the international order. Cybersecurity frameworks have become crucial in the face of fundamental changes in global politics and economics, largely due to the emergence of new influential players, such as China. An era of international relations reevaluation is upon us with China's rise to global superpower status. Its massive economic influence and assertive foreign policy bring forth a new paradigm. This shift has led to the evolution of traditional power structures, where military strength and territorial control dominated. Nowadays, cyber capabilities, digital infrastructure, and information control are crucial to a nation's security due to the interconnectedness of the modern world. The digital age has ushered in a new era of security concerns. With the increasing prevalence of cyberattacks and the weaponization of information, national borders are no longer the primary battleground. To combat this new reality, cybersecurity frameworks have become the cornerstone of national defense strategies. These measures protect against attacks on critical infrastructure, safeguard sensitive data, and defend national interests in the digital sphere. Due to the rise of China and the increasing importance of cyber capabilities, the global order of today has undergone a significant shift. Countries must acknowledge the vital role that cybersecurity plays in present-day security conversations if they wish to succeed and maneuver through the intricacies of the current landscape.

Chairs: Dr. Rafael Velazquez Flores (Universidad Autonoma de Baja California, MX) & Dr. Jorge A. Schiavon (Universidad Iberoamericana, MX)

Abstract: In a more complex international system, the Foreign Policy decision-making process becomes a key element to link any state with the world. Therefore, the purpose of this section is to include papers and panels that are oriented to the study of Foreign Policy from a comparative perspective. The idea is to incorporate authors who are working on the role that Foreign Policy plays in a world of flux. Tentatively, papers must consider domestic and international variables that explain foreign policy decisions. They also have to take into consideration different actors that participate in the decision-making process.

Chairs:

Aleksandra Maria Spalińska (University of Warsaw, Poland & University of Sussex, England)
Jochen Kleinschmidt (Dresden University of Technology, Germany)

Abstract: The discipline of International Relations (IR) is based on the presumption that world politics is based on a state system, and that the domestic realm is hierarchical, whereas the state system is anarchical. This presumption is challenged by the literature on functional differentiation and contestation, including non-state actors and state crisis (Charountaki and Irrera, 2022; Cerny, 2023). However, statism and the imperium as the legalised power continue to dominate IR regardless of current events in world politics. Specifically, they place restrictions on the ontology of IR. Despite having the international as the central concept, IR remains power-centric and sovereignty-centric, which contributes to the marginalisation of non-state and societal dimensions of world politics in the study of IR. This 6-panels section responds to this problem by inviting scholars to discuss the limits of the state/society binary, their manifestations, and implications for the study of IR. We welcome papers that study the issues of state/society binary, and its consequences for IR. In particular, we are interested in mechanisms and practices that contest the anarchical logic of the state system or the hierarchical order in the domestic realm. That includes transnational and societal tensions in development, functional differentiation, societal dimension of world politics, (post)colonial and structural entanglements, non-state contestation and securitisation, or local and domestic responses to global impacts. Moreover, we invite papers on theories that tackle the problem of statism in IR, such as heterarchy (Cerny, 2023) and societal multiplicity (Rosenberg, 2016). We welcome both theoretically and empirically oriented contributions. 

Chairs: Prof. Agata Wiktoria Ziętek (Maria Curie Skłodowska University, PL) & Prof. Ewa Trojnar (Jagiellonian University in Krakow, PL)

Abstract: The Indo-Pacific region is currently facing several security hotspots: North Korea, Taiwan, the South China Sea, and the East China Sea. Additionally, numerous security challenges exist, including but not limited to piracy and terrorism, cybersecurity, and trade wars. Maintaining regional peace and stability requires the continued attention of both state and non-state actors, regional and external powers, as well as regional and global institutions.

By identifying regional flashpoints, this section aims to study the Indo-Pacific regional security architecture. Therefore, we pose the following questions: What roles do the main actors play in the Indo-Pacific regional security architecture, including ASEAN, China, Japan, the United States, India, Australia, and the European Union? To what degree does their complex involvement in regional affairs, including cooperation, competition, and rivalry, indicate that the Indo-Pacific region is in a state of flux? Do these relations highlight continuity, change, or contestation of the regional order in the Indo-Pacific? What should the regional security architecture look like in the future to secure regional stability and peace? Finally, which research approach best facilitates the study of the Indo-Pacific regional security architecture?

Chair: Prof. Tomasz Kamiński (University of Lodz, PL)

Abstract: The section explores the evolving role of cities and regions, in the global political landscape. Traditionally, discussions on 'sovereignty,' 'security,' and 'hierarchy' have been dominated by nation-states. However, subnational actors have become active participants in recent years, influencing global politics. They are no longer on the periphery but are central players in this transformative era.

Substate actors, driven by localised challenges and opportunities, establish direct international relationships, sometimes bypassing national mandates to assert their global interests. This interplay between local and global aspirations provides valuable insights into their innovative strategies. First, with processes of globalisation blurring the lines between the local and global, subnational entities are increasingly addressing global challenges, such as climate change or public health crises. Second, their unique ontology, grounded in local realities but aiming for global impact, offers valuable lessons for scholars and practitioners in international relations, highlighting the need for more inclusive, multi-layered, pluralistic and collaborative global governance models.

The rationale: Further reevaluation of fundamental IR concepts of 'sovereignty,' 'security,' or 'hierarchy', considering the growing acceptance of cities and substate entities as global actors. This section emphasises the importance of considering the role of subnational entities in these changing dynamics.

Interdisciplinary insights: Given the complexity of local motivations and global dynamics, this section adopts an interdisciplinary approach to provide a nuanced understanding of paradiplomatic practices.

The comparative approach: This section facilitates discussions between academics researching paradiplomacy across various legal and political contexts. It allows us to compare different theoretical explorations grounded in different real-world experiences. 

Chairs: Prof. Maria Grazia Melchionni (Rivista di Studi Politici Internazionali - SAPIENZA University of Rome, IT) & Claudio Cecchi (SAPIENZA University of Rome, Italy; EURISPES - BRICS lab)

Abstract: The last decades have shown the fragility of the world order built at the end of World War II. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, the spreading of globalization, and the economic liberalization in China, every type of aggregation of nation states has undergone a transformation that has changed its purpose and functioning. International organizations, coalitions and alliances have implemented major changes to face the necessary reductions in the sovereignty of member states to ensure more effective functioning. This process has been enhanced by the emergence of new demands from developing countries, undermining the established hierarchy. The last two decades have been characterized by uncertainty and instability of the international scenario following September 11, 2001. The protection of the security of Western sovereign states, until then guaranteed by the NATO alliance with United States as leader, has been challenged by an unprecedented terrorist attack which has revealed the Western fragility and weakness. At the same time, to counter the emergence of a dominant role for China, the Unite States have increased their influence on the Asia-Pacific region by means of new international agreements. The events of recent years provide strong evidence of the Western inability to ensure a long-lasting period of peace defining new hierarchies within international organizations and alliances. Today, a new world order is far away and difficult to anticipate. It is therefore necessary to examine the trajectories towards an imaginary new and shared world order through the observation of recent socio-economic and political changes.

Chairs: Prof. Marcial Suarez (Universidade Federal Fluminense, BR), Dirk Kruijt (Utrecht University, Netherland) & Tatiana Moura (Coimbra University, Portugal)

Abstract: The first decades of the century have seen several challenges to the idea of international law and society, as well as the general propositions of a liberal international order. The leading premise of this section is to explore the causes, manifestations, and the idea of hybrid governance, which is by no means complex, however, we consider that in a moment of stress in the contemporary political process, mainly in Latin America, the theme emerges with centrality. In contrast to other regions in the world where populist contestations and erosion of democracy have been taking place since the early 2010s, societal violence was already high in Latin America, e.g., among the 50 most violent cities in the world, 43 are in Latin America. This situation has led to a perfect storm to escalate violence combining structural inequalities, the weak rule of law, the emergence of populism, and embedded organized crime in several regions within countries. Latin America requires long-term policies, this section discusses how effective or not the current strategies of militarization, contestations to liberal economic policies and democracy, reduction of corruption, and strengthening the rule of law are to manage or reduce violence in the region.

Chairs: Dr. Erica Resende (Brazilian War College, BR) & Anna Wojciuk (University of Warsaw)

Abstract: Over the recent decade, populism has emerged as a global phenomenon eroding democracy. Although populists have been voted out of power in several countries, they continue to exert an impact on political discourse, with all the consequences for, among others, international politics. The emergence of populism as a domestic driver of contestation challenges the discipline of International Relations. It prompts IR scholars to acknowledge the short-and longer-term implications of populism for the uncertainty- and conflict-affected international arena. This section is an attempt to respond to the conference call by posing the following questions: How does populism contest and challenge the international order? How do international actors react to it? What are the consequences of populist politics for international cooperation and international institutions? What are the characteristics of populist foreign policy for the world order? What is the role of emotions, affect and ideologies – including racism, nativism, colonialism, antisemitism, and misogyny – in constructing populism as a driver of contestation of the international order? How has the pandemic impacted populist projects worldwide and, more generally, what have populists won/lost on the multiple crises in world politics? What should academics and practitioners do to address populism as a driver for contestation?

Chairs: Dr. Ahmet Yusuf Özdemir (Ibn Haldun University, TR) & Najiba Mustafayeva (Ibn Haldun University, Turkiye)

Abstract: The goal of this section would be to foster a comprehensive understanding of the complex issues surrounding such issues as international armed conflicts, the right to self-defense, and collective security in a rapidly changing international order. Amid discussions evolving around the changing nature of war (i.e. “New Wars”), theoretical and methodological critiques and contributions become inevitable for IR scholars.

This section would typically focus on discussing and analyzing various aspects related to armed conflicts, warfare, and the changing dynamics of international security within the context of a rapidly changing global landscape. The proposed section of a conference might cover a wide range of topics, including the panels below:

1. Conflict Analysis: A fundamental aspect would be the analysis of ongoing and recent armed conflicts worldwide. This could include discussions on the causes, actors involved, and the consequences of these conflicts.

2. International Armed Conflicts: The panel would delve into the legal frameworks governing international armed conflicts, namely International Humanitarian Law.

3. Transnationalism: The impact of armed conflicts not only on refugees and internally displaced persons, but also on the most basic ideas of statehood, such as citizenship, borders and passports, would be a critical part of the discussion.

4. Technology and Warfare: With advancements in technology, discussions on how technologies like artificial intelligence, drones, and autonomous weapons systems are impacting warfare and security strategies could be featured.

Chairs: Jennifer Jefferis & Rebecca Patterson (Georgetown University, United States of America)

Abstract: American football coach Vince Lombardi famously said “winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.” And yet as the world order rapidly changes, the meaning of winning – in war, in politics and in strategic competition, is wildly unclear. This section will explore what “winning” look like in relations between states in today’s rapidly changing security environment. The section will explore this question from two perspectives: first from the perspective of international conflict and second from the perspective of the domestic drivers of contestation. By fostering conversation that spans from competition to conflict and domestic to international drivers, this section directly engages with the question of how we should approach key concepts such as security as well as the question of how new domestic drivers of contestation relate to international relations.

Chairs: Prof. Joanna Starzyk-Sulejewska (University of Warsaw, PL) & Joanna Marszałek-Kawa (Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń)

Abstract: The changes in the normative sphere and the conceptualization of the contemporary international order and its accompanying institutional reconfiguration result from redistribution of power in international relations and changes in the system of values and norms legitimizing the current changes in the global order. We propose to consider international order as the system of entities whose relations are regulated by certain norms and institutions based on the balance of power ensuring their reproduction; it also concerns economic dimension and the cultural and ideological sphere legitimizing its functioning. In shaping the contemporary international order, apart from states, non-state participants in international relations, especially international intergovernmental organizations (IGO’s), play an important role. The positions, actions and decisions of IGO’s are a result of a compromise between the interests of their member states and thus influence the shaping of the contemporary international order and changes within it in a different way than the actions of individual states. The aim of the Session will be to analyze the impact of the most important global, regional and subregional international intergovernmental organizations on shaping the contemporary international order in different areas, such as: protection and promotion of human rights, maintaining international peace and security, foreign policy, development cooperation, humanitarian aid, asylum and immigration policy, environmental policy, protection of public health etc. On the other hand, we are interested in the analysis of the most important determinants influencing the evolution of the role of selected IGO’s and the changes in the rules of their functioning.

Chair: Dr. Devika Misra (OP Jindal Global University, IN)

Abstract: The Western gaze of IR has been thoroughly identified, if not completely displaced. Much has been written about the exclusionary principles that guided the formation of the discipline of International Relations where experiences of the West were converted into postulates of truth and explanation for the rest of the world. Amidst conversations on feminist, intersectional, decolonial, postcolonial and critical approaches to studying and writing IR theory, there is much deliberation on what the Global South can do to displace the western gaze of IR and to locate principles from its varied experiences in IR theorizing which reimagine what IR could potentially look like, were it to make an attempt at inclusivity.

However, dangers of nativism, parochialism as well as the potential for the construction of grand exclusionary narratives have often been underlined in such exercises. How does the South position itself in global terms and how do the fragments of excluded marginalities find space in the schema of grand narratives of theory building exercises? What are the politics of exclusion that play out in conversations on inclusivity, and how do these confront claims of novelty, meaning and explanation in the politics of knowledge production? What is the potential for disruption and what are the contours of its violence?

Chairs: Prof. Brendan Mark Howe (Ewha Womans University, KR) & Andy Sumner (Kings College London & EADI)

Abstract: International Studies is more than just the study of IR. In addition to political considerations, it involves development cooperation, international business and trade, comparative, and cross- cultural studies. Of these neglected perspectives, the role of development and its impact on the core assumptions of international studies is most deserving of greater attention. Hence, this proposal spans two of the themes of the conference – ‘How should we approach key concepts?’ and ‘How should we approach interdisciplinarity?’ To do so it channels the expertise of the two proposing associations, both of which are already networks of networks.

The Asian Political and International Studies Association (APISA), a WISC member, is the premier academic association in Asia dealing with international studies broadly defined, with research clusters on development, human security, democracy, and security sector reform. The European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI) is celebrating 50 years of cooperation between the major development institutions in Europe. Together we are making concerted efforts to reconnect international studies and development studies. The UN pillars of Peace and Security, Development, and Human Rights, form the core of our proposal, and relate to key (essentially contested) concepts of international studies. These include challenges to the referent object of security in global and national governance, the relationship between insecurity and development challenges, how different development perspectives address poverty and inequality, and how distributive injustice can be a source of insecurity at all levels.

Chairs: Karina Jędrzejowska & Anna Wrobel (University of Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract: Early in 2023, the International Monetary Fund released a policy analysis: “Geoeconomic Fragmentation and the Future of Multilateralism”. It states that after several decades of progress in global economic integration, the global economy is on the verge of a reverse process of geoeconomic fragmentation. Since the global financial crisis, global economy was faced with major tensions in form of Brexit, U.S-China trade war, Covid-19 pandemic and numerous military conflicts. Moreover, the last years have brought about an increase in trade protectionism, major disruptions in global value chains, inflation and growing debt burdens together with a rise of poverty rates. As such, it can be assumed that the global economy is currently heading for an unprecedented confluence of economic, financial and debt crises. Given the scope of the global problems, international cooperation appears even more important than ever. Yet the policy practice of major players contradicts this statement as the above factors contributed to a growing pessimism with regards to the future of globalization and multilateral global economic governance. Therefore, the section offers a multidisciplinary approach towards analyzing current processes and challenges to global economic governance with special reference to the impact of geoeconomic fragmentation on global economy. In particular, the section attempts to address the following questions: 1) What are the potential risks and consequences of a policy-driven reversal of global economic integration; 2) Is an efficient multilateral governance system of global economy still possible; and 3) Is it possible to preserve the benefits of global economic integration and multilateralism.

Chairs: Gerardo Rodríguez Sánchez Lara (Universidad de las Américas Puebla, Mexico) & José Luis García Aguilar (Universidad Iberoamericana Puebla, Mexico)

Abstract: The proposed name for the section is International Security. The international agenda in the past four years has suffered several changes in its core: from pandemics to wars, violent extremism to natural disasters, women, peace and security, some examples of new actors or evolved ones. To understand the changing world and the latest agendas, it is necessary to approach concepts of sovereignty, security, peace, and threats and comprehend the role of different international and regional actors. The agenda has shapeshifted and been updated to understand and target topics like pandemics, cyberattacks, cyber terrorism, regional security, and new implications for international studies. Having panels and roundtables with experts on the matter will enrich the comprehension of hot spots of global security. The economic, political, diplomatic, and security atmosphere is in a rapidly evolving international order; the understanding of security scenarios, new threats, and their impact on the international agenda is the key to creating a mutual account of different regions and sharing points of view.

Chair: Prof. Jakub Zajaczkowski (University of Warsaw, PL)

Abstract: This section aims to decode the main assumptions and perceptions of the rising power of the global South toward the Liberal International Order (LIO). The US-led Western Front created the order after the Second World War. Establishing the global financial, political, and legal institutions, the US became the gatekeeper of the LIO. However, due to globalization and the changing scenario of the distribution of power in world politics, the rhetoric about the emergence of ‘revisionist power’ is often thrown around. After the end of the Cold War, rising powers from Latin America, Africa, and Asia have all left an indelible mark on the global economic architecture.

In the shade of the changing scenario in International Order, this section attempts to analyze if the rising power from the global South has any intention to challenge the existing ILO. While choosing the case studies regarding the rising powers from the Global South, the section will pay attention to their democratic nature, their regional power status, and their colonial past.

The section investigates the answers to the following questions:

- How do global South rising powers perceive international liberal order?

- How do they perceive the growing great power politics in the world system?

What are the sources of the rising power of the global south approach to international liberal order?

- What are their perceptions toward regional and global security architecture? (Peace, War, Intervention, Human Rights, and conflict management)

Chair: Prof. Thomas Diez (University of Tuebingen, DE)

Abstract: This section focuses on the processes and consequences of the demise of the post-Cold War Liberal International Order. The optimism of a solidarization of international society in which states would take on responsibilities for subjects beyond their state borders and cooperate with civil society actors in global governance has given way to an increasing preponderance of geopolitics in which even the basic elements of international order seem to be threatened. This section is seeking panel and paper proposals that address the causes, dynamics and prospects of this international society in flux. What are the driving forces for solidarization and pluralisation? To what extent do we witness a re-pluralisation or even demise of international order? How are core institutions of international society such as diplomacy and international law changing? How can international institutions withstand the pressures of revisionist great powers? What are the contours of the emerging international order? To what extent is cooperation still possible to tackle different global challenges? And what role do regional orders play in this world to come? We welcome both papers that make explicit use of an international society framework and those who contribute to the analysis of these issues from other angles. Papers may focus on theoretical and conceptual development or may analyse particular developments or processes.

Chair: Prof. Vivienne Jabri (King's College London, UK)

Abstract: With the emergence of the postcolonial international order came the promise of both self-determination and calls for global justice. Yet populations across the world remain in the grip of multiple inequalities, subjected as they are to racialised and gendered hierarchies of worth in contexts that include war and militarised interventions, economic expropriation and exploitation, and the environmental destruction of lived spaces. Each of these is implicated in embodied, socio-cultural, socio-political and material injuries manifest across the Global South in particular. Our discipline’s conventional understanding of the ‘international order’ has always been ill-equipped to service the demands of justice, prioritising as it has done taken for granted assumptions about what constitutes international politics and the international political economy. There are, of course, normative perspectives on justice, yet these fail to offer the analytics that the subject demands nor the concepts that can work towards both analysis and transformation. Critical interventions have enabled us to rethink operations of power globally, but these too raise the question of how we can prioritise matters of global justice in our reflections on the international. The aim of the section is to take these critical interventions further, through deliberations that are historical, conceptual, empirical, and methodological, each driven by the question of the section’s title.

Chairs: Prof. Senem Aydin-Duzgit (Sabanci University, Turkey) & Dr. Zeynep Gulsah Capan (University of Erfurt, Germany)

Abstract: World politics is currently in a state of radical uncertainty, marked by both change and continuity, as well as contestation of the predominant practices, norms and actors of the international order. As IR scholars, we are placed in the position of making sense of how international relations is evolving, where the order(s) that we know are heading and the drivers behind the continuity, change and contestation that we observe. Doing so however is no easy endeavor and requires methodological and theoretical rigor, interdisciplinarity where necessary and possible, and a global lens which transcends the North-South divide. This global lens is all the more necessary when we consider the complex entangled nature of the shifts in global politics today. This fits with the core mission of the World International Studies Committee, which is to promote academic exchange and deliberation on the key and pressing topics of international relations in an inclusive format, where the voices and agency of the ‘North’ and the ‘South’ are equally recognized and incorporated in relational dialogue.