Beyond the pejorative : sphere of influence in international theory

Abstract

This study undertakes to contest the concept of sphere of infl uence from a historical perspective with a focus on normative questions and international order. While the concept of sphere of infl uence is frequently used in political parlance, it has not been studied within the discipline of International Relations. What is more, the term ”sphere of infl uence” is used in a pejorative sense to criticise Russian foreign policy. The research identifi es the pejorative uses of the concept and then proceeds to discuss normative aspects of spheres of infl uence in international theory. In the process, sphere of influence is transformed from a map metaphor into a concept which encompasses issues of justice and international order.

The history of the concept of sphere of infl uence begins with identifying how it acquired its pejorative ring, that is, the concept became associated with the foreign policy of Russia. What follows are four chapters on the history and theory of spheres of infl uence. The fi rst episode explores historical examples such as suzerainty and colonialism, as well as the emergence of a hierarchical international order. The second reveals the untapped pool of ideas related to international order, sovereignty, great powers, the balance of power and non-intervention in the English School theory. The pluralist and solidarist underpinnings of international society come alive as a framework for linking the concept of sphere of infl uence to conceptualisations of international order. Spheres of infl uence are situated at the equilibrium point of a pendulum which sweeps an arc from the sovereign nation-state at one end to humanity at the other.

The third chapter looks into theories on spheres of infl uence “between nation and humanity” which were developed in the turmoil of the world wars. The ideas of Friedrich Naumann, Carl Schmitt, E.H. Carr, James Burnham, Walter Lippmann and George Orwell focus more on bringing about peace than causing war and confl ict. Finally, a chapter on the Cold War, drawing on the example of the Cuban Missile Crisis, explores the period in history which has made the strongest impact on the present understanding of sphere of infl uence. It becomes clear that even Cold War spheres of infl uence are a source of theory which we have ignored. Once the historical and theoretical roots of the concept have been unveiled, Russian ideas on international order and infl uence beyond state borders are analysed in order to problematise the Western canon dealing with “Russia’s sphere of infl uence”. The Russian idea of a sphere of influence is clouded by an indecision in choosing between the pluralist and solidarist international orders. The Russian authors’ unwavering defence of sovereignty and simultaneous admiration of ”the concert of great responsible powers” has resulted in an inability to openly propose a system of international governance with spheres of influence. The unique contribution of this dissertation is to put forward normative considerations pertaining to spheres of infl uence instead of using the concept in a pejorative sense. The study connects the English School tradition, post-war international order, the Cold War and Russian thought with the concept of sphere of infl uence with the aim of initiating a debate which will enrich the discipline with a fresh outlook on an old but topical concept.