Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:33:23.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Entry into international society reconceptualised: the case of Russia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 August 2010

IVER B. NEUMANN
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article addresses how entry into international society has been conceptualised, suggests a reconceptualisation that will make the concept more relational, and illustrates with a case study. Part one attempts a summary of relevant debates without the English School, and directs attention to the importance of how entrants draw on memories of its subject position in the suzerain system that it left as it entered international society. Part two discuses the experiences of Russia's predecessor polities, with the focus being on the place of Russian principalities within the suzerain system of the Golden Horde (ca. 1240–1500). I argue that Russia's basic stance towards European polities in the 16th and early 17th centuries is readily understandable in terms of a key memory, namely the one of being dominated by this polity, which was itself an outgrowth of the Mongol empire. Part three demonstrates how the resulting understanding of politics was confirmed by Russian experiences in the 16th and 17th centuries. I suggest that Russia never really let go of its memories of being part of a suzerain system, and that it is therefore still suspended somewhere in the outer tier of international society.

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 463 - 484
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Bull, Hedley and Watson, Adam (eds), The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984)Google Scholar .

2 Morgan, David, The Mongols (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986), p. 141Google Scholar ; Halperin, Charles J., ‘Muscovite Political Institutions in the 14th Century’, Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, New Series, 1:2 (2000), pp. 237–257Google Scholar .

3 Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society. A Study of Order in World Politics (London: Macmillan, 1977), pp. 9–10, 13Google Scholar .

4 Neumann, Iver B. and Welsh, Jennifer M., ‘The Other in European Self-Definition. A Critical Addendum to the Literature on International Society’, Review of International Studies, 17:4 (1991), pp. 327–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar . The theoretical inspiration for that attack was the post-structural conceptualisation of identity, where the key point is that any identity is predicated on delineation from something outside itself. The corollary is that the outside is constitutive of identity.

5 ‘The greater the cultural unity of a states-system, the greater its sense of distinctness from the surrounding world is likely to be’; Wight, Martin (ed. Bull, Hedley), Systems of States (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1977), p. 34Google Scholar .

6 Bull and Watson, Expansion.

7 Keene, Edward, Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, Colonialism and Order in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

8 Comp. Gong, Garrit W., The Standard of ‘Civilization’ in International Society (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984a)Google Scholar .

9 Keal, Paul, European Conquest and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: The Moral Backwardness of International Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003)Google Scholar ; also Epp, Roger, ‘The English School on the Frontiers of International Society: A Hermeneutic Approach’, Review of International Studies, 24:5 (1998), pp. 47–63Google Scholar .

10 Mayall, James, Nationalism and International Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), p. 151Google Scholar ; James, Alan, ‘System or Society’, Review of International Studies, 19:3 (1993), pp. 269–288Google Scholar ; Buzan, Barry, ‘From International System to International Society: Structural Realism and Regime Theory Meet the English School’, International Organization, 47:3 (1993), pp. 327–352Google Scholar .

11 Buzan, Barry, From International to World Society: English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

12 Wight, , Systems, p. 28Google Scholar , comp. Suzuki, Shogo‘Japan's Socialization into Janus-Faced European International Society’, European Journal of International Relations, 11:1 (2005), pp. 137–164, on p. 156Google Scholar . International society is conceived as being an anarchical society. As Durkheim pointed out, however, societies are despotic, in the sense that they lay down what should count as normal behaviour and so may be seen as a structure of power (systems are arrangements through which values are authoritatively allocated for a society, as Easton would have it). The tension between anarchy on the one hand and society on the other is the constitutive tension of the School. By dint of an internal logical, then, the Grotian tradition seems to be the broad home for the School itself.

13 Linklater, Andrew and Suganami, Hidemi, The English School of International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 189–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar . For them, however, this should preferably be a typically modernist and historiosophical undertaking sketching ‘long-term historical processes in which visions of the unity of the human race influence the development of the states-system’, p. 190.

14 Watson, Adam, The Evolution of International Society: A Comparative Historical Analysis (London: Routledge, 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

15 Buzan, Barry and Little, Richard, International Systems in World History: Remaking the Study of International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000)Google Scholar .

16 Bull and Watson, Expansion. For China, see Zhang, Yongjin, ‘China's Entry into International Society: Beyond the Standard of “Civilization”’, Review of International Studies, 17:1 (1991), pp. 3–16Google Scholar . For Russia, see Neumann, Iver B., Russia and the idea of Europe: A Study in Identity and International Relations (London: Routledge 1996)Google Scholar , and Uses of the Other: ‘The East’ in European Identity Formation (Minneapolis, MN.: University of Minnesota Press, 1999). For Greece, see Stivachtis, Yannis A., The Enlargement of International Society: Culture versus Anarchy and Greece's Entry into International Society (London: Macmillan, 1998)Google Scholar . For Japan, see Suzuki, Japan's Socialisation. See also Sharp, Paul‘Mullah Zaeef and Taliban diplomacy: An English School Approach’, Review of International Studies, 29:4 (2003), pp. 481–498Google Scholar .

17 O'Hagan, Jacintha, Conceptualizing the West in International Relations: From Spengler to Said (London: Palgrave, 2002), p. 129CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

18 Dunne, Tim, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School (London: Macmillan, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

19 Nora, Pierre, (ed. Kritzman, Lawrence D.), Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past, Three Vols. (New York, NY: Columbia University Press [1984] 1996–1998)Google Scholar ; Halbwachs, Maurice, The Collective Memory New York, NY: Harper & Row, [1950] 1980)Google Scholar . For an overview of work within IR, see Bell, Duncan (ed.), Memory. Trauma and World Politics: Reflections on the Relationship Between Past and Present (Houndsmills: Palgrave, 2009)Google Scholar and works quoted therein.

20 Leach, Edmund, Political Systems of Highland Burma: A Study of Kachin Structure (London: Athlone, 1954)Google Scholar .

21 Wolf, Eric R., Europe and the People Without History (Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1982)Google ScholarPubMed .

22 Fabian, Johannes, Time and the Other (New York, NY.: Columbia University Press, 1983)Google Scholar .

23 Watson, Adam, ‘Russia and the European States System’, in Bull, Hedley & Watson, Adam (eds), The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984), pp. 61–74, on p. 61Google Scholar .

24 But comp. Buzan & Little, International Systems.

25 Watson, Expansion, pp. 61–2, 17.

26 Gong, Garrit W., ‘China's Entry into International Society’, in Bull, Hedley & Watson, Adam (eds), The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984b). pp. 171–184, on p. 180Google Scholar .

27 Within the discipline, the first call to arms for such an approach was Jackson, Patrick T. and Nexon, Daniel H., ‘Relations before States: Substance, Process and the Study of World Politics’, European Journal of International Relations, 5:3 (1999), pp. 291–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

28 The prerequisite is that it does not come out of a situation of non-system, as it were of a high degree of isolation.

29 Sahlins, Marshall, Historical Metaphors and Mythical Realities. Structure in the Early History of the Sandwich Islands Kingdom (Ann Arbor, MI.: University of Michigan Press, 1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

30 Copeland, Dale C., The Origins of Major Wars (Ithaca, NY.: Cornell University Press, 2000)Google Scholar .

31 Wight, Systems.

32 Fennell, John L.I., The Crisis of Medieval Russia 1200–1304 (London: Longman, 1983), pp. 17–19Google Scholar .

33 Fennell, Crisis, pp. 27, 34, 73–75.

34 Allsen, Thomas T., Mongol Imperialism. The Politics of the Great Qan Möngke in China, Russia, and the Islamic Lands, 1251–1259 (Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press, 1987), p. 5Google Scholar .

35 Allsen, Mongol Imperialism, p. 42.

36 de Rachewiltz, Igor, Papal Envoys to the Great Khans (London: Faber & Faber, 1971), p. 104Google Scholar .

37 Barfield, Thomas, The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989)Google Scholar .

38 Allsen, Mongol Imperialism, p. 101.

39 Ibid., pp. 80–1.

40 Ibid., p. 45.

41 A correspondence is often assumed between the four sons and the subsequent Mongol-led polities in China, Persia, Central Asia and Russia, but as argued in Jackson, Peter, ‘From Ulus to Khanate: the Making of the Mongol States, c. 1220–c. 1290’, pp. 12–37 in Amitai-Preiss, Reuven & Morgan, David (eds), The Mongol Empire and its Legacy (Leiden: Brill, 1999), pp. 12–37Google Scholar , this is too neat.

42 Morgan, The Mongols, p. 82.

43 Allsen, Mongol Imperialism, pp. 62–3.

44 The Golden Horde had been in dynastic crisis since the death of Khan Berdibeg in 1359, one reason being the swelling of the numbers of the Golden Kin, see Spuler, Berthold, Die Goldene Horde: Die Mongolen in Russland 1223–1502, vol. two (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1965)Google Scholar . The object of the invasion was Khan Tokhtamesh (1376–1395), a previous protégé of Tamerlane's who succeeded in uniting the Golden Horde with the White Horde to its east. The White Horde had been established by the same Mongol campaign that spied out the Russian lands in 1223.

45 Allsen, Mongol Imperialism, p. 114.

46 Ibid., p. 124; comp. Jackson, Peter, The Mongols and the West, 1221–1410 (Harlow: Pearson Longman, 2005Google Scholar .

47 Halperin, and , C[harles] J.Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History (Bloomington, IN.: Indiana University Press), 1985, p. 33Google Scholar .

48 Fennell, Crisis, p. 108.

49 The Nogay, named after the Mongol Nogay Khan, based in the Caucasus around present-day Kalmykia and harbouring a number of Khipchaks, were at loggerheads with the rest of the Golden Horde in the 1290s, and established themselves as a khanate in 1319. They ‘built a power base in the Crimea and the Balkans and contested with the khans of the lower Volga for control of the Golden Horde’, Halperin, Russian and The Golden Horde, p. 18.

50 The two other cities to be ruled by Grand Dukes, Nizhniy Novgorod and Ryazan’, came up short on both counts.

51 Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde, p. 58.

52 Ibid., p. 51.

53 Ibid., p. 54; for details, see Vernadsky, George, The Mongols and Russia. A History of Russia, vol. III (New Haven, CN.: Yale University Press, 1953), p. 207Google Scholar .

54 Comp. Vernadsky, The Mongols and Russia, p. 264.

55 Kappeler, Andreas, The Russian Empire: A Multiethnic History (London: Longman, 2001)Google Scholar .

56 Fennell, Crisis, p. 122, note 15.

57 Vernadsky, The Mongols and Russia, p. 196.

58 Fennell, Crisis, p. 89.

59 Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde, p. 81.

60 Meyerdorff, John, Byzantium and the Rise of Russia. A Study of Byzantine-Russian Relations in the Fourteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981)Google Scholar .

61 Poe, Marshall T., ‘A People Born to Slavery’: Russia in Early European Ethnography, 1476–1748 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2000), pp. 12–13Google Scholar .

62 Already in 1481, Emperor Frederick III addressed an appeal on behalf of the Germans in Livonia to Poland and Lithuania, Sweden and the Hanseatic Cities about this polity.

63 Zorin, V. A., et al. (eds), Istoriya diplomatii, second ed. (Moscow: Gospolitizdat, 1959), p. 262Google Scholar .

64 Neumann, Iver B., ‘Russia's Standing as a Great Power, 1492–1815’, in Hopf, Ted (ed.), Russia's European Choices (New York, NY.: Palgrave, 2008), pp. 13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

65 Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde, p. 8, comp. p. 63.

66 Cherniavsky, Michael, ‘Khan or Basileus: An Aspect of Russian Medieval Political Theory’, in Cherniavsky, Michael (ed.), The Structure of Russian History (New York, NY.: Random House, [1959] 1970), pp. 195–211Google Scholar .

67 Russian borrowings from the Mongols were extensive, see Vernadsky, The Mongols and Russia, pp. 127–30, 222–3, 333–90; Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde, pp. 90–5, 149, n. 7 and, for maximalist readings, Ostrowski, Donald G., Muscovy and the Mongols. Cross-Cultural Influences on the Steppe Frontier, 1304–1589 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998)Google Scholar , and ‘Muscovite Adaptation of Steppe Political Institutions: A Reply to Halperin's Objections’, Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, New Series, 1:2 (1998), pp. 267–97.

68 The alternative is to postulate a universal animus diominandi whereby all polities would aim for the top.

69 Vernadsky, The Mongols and Russia, p. 296.

70 Pelenski, Jaroslaw, ‘Muscovite Imperial Claims to the Kazan Khanate’, Slavic Review, 26:4 (1967), pp. 559–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

71 de Hartog, Leo, Russia and the Mongol Yoke: The History of the Russian Principalities and the Golden Horde, 1221–1502 (London: I.B. Tauris, 1995)Google Scholar .

72 Kappeler, Russian Empire, p. 26.

73 Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde, p. 92.

74 As late as the seventeenth century, the emigré Muscovite bureaucrat Gregorii Kotoshikin explained that the ruler of Muscovy was a tsar ‘by virtue of Ivan IV's conquest of Kazan’; Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde, p. 100.

75 Halperin, Russia and the Golden Horde, p. 13.

76 Zorin, Istoriya diplomatii, p. 140.

77 Neumann, Uses of the Other.