Genocide and the Three Traditions

Abstract

The disciplines of IR and Genocide Studies do not represent two singular families of thought that can be simply introduced to one another. Understanding genocide within the context of international relations requires not only an understanding of genocide (Chapter 2) but also of international relations. Accordingly, this chapter utilises Andrew Linklater’s application of Martin Wight’s three traditions (realism, rationalism, revolutionism) in order to distinguish between an international system, an international society, and an international community perspective of international relations.1 The value of this approach is that it enables a three-way dialogue to be forged between competing world views which highlights how the assumptions embodied within one’s view of international relations shapes one’s understanding of issues such as diplomacy, war, human nature, the security dilemma, and in this case, genocide. The utility of this tripartite framework, therefore, helps explain its revival over the last two decades and underpins the ES’s commitment to theoretical pluralism which will be discussed below.2 While this is something that is often alluded to in ES literature, Chapters 3 and 7 of this book put such thinking into practice as they engage with realist, ES, and cosmopolitan perspectives in order to provide insight into understanding genocide in international relations.