All Azimuth

This trend is well reflected in the emergence and consolidation of IR subfields or problématiques in the name of sociology of IR, historiography of IR, global IR, and the like.2 It is also clearly illustrated by the vast work within the ‘Teaching, Research & International Policy’ (TRIP) project.3 An intriguing name depicting the bulk of the burgeoning literature is ‘reflexive studies on IR,’ compo. [...] The latter perspective focuses on power relations and patterned interactions within the field.5 A series of issues has been raised in the search for disciplinary identity, i.e., IR self-reflection, representatively including: a) the role of specific conceptualizations of the ‘international,’ b) the social and intellectual structuring of the field/discipline, c) the state of affairs, but also the r. [...] Ifestos, when the latter harshly noted the propensity of IR communities in “small and dependent states” for “intellectual corruption, political conscription and indecent behavior.”8 Despite the following narrative’s obvious comparative tone, the scrutiny of the Couloumbis hypothesis renders it primarily a view of Greek IR through the filter of the Turkish case and extensive reference to the latter. [...] Within Turkish scholarship, this predicament of the dominance of issues deemed important for Turkey’s foreign affairs24 was eloquently presented in terms of “Telling Turkey About the World, Telling the World About Turkey,” i.e., of addressing the country’s role in the World—e.g., the West, but eventually also beyond it—and vice versa.25 It was extensively discussed in the name of ‘periphery theori. [...] The disciplinary solidification in Turkey involved the establishment of IR departments mainly in the name of ‘International Relations’ or ‘Political Science and International Relations.’38 In this sense, the study of politics seems to elicit the emergence of IR as an integral scientific field rather than as just a sub-field of Political Science.