Honor in International Relations
Chaymae Samir
SciencesPo Paris Campus de Menton Foreign Policy Making in the Middle East
Research Paper
Subject :
« The Concept of Honor in International Relations : the personalization of the state »
INTRODUCTION
“Political units have their amour-propre, as people do” Raymond Aron.
As the Greeks understood better human motives, Socrate in his Republic identifies three psychic drives: spirit, appetite and reason. Socrate attributes many vigorous and competitive characteristics to “thumos” (known as the spirit), but most importantly he tells us that by surpassing or equalling the skills of people we praise in our societies, we build self-esteem and earn the respect of others. The spirit desires all sorts of victories, thus achieving honor. Following the Enlightenment, philosophical thinkers and social scientists have reduced reason to an instrument and appetite to a drive. All existing narratives of politics, if not of international relations, find their roots in appetite. Since Thucydides, Plato and Aristotle, and although manifested in different ways, the spirit's quest for self-esteem1 is universal. Studying the spirit as an important motive in international relations is a hard task because we assume that it can only express itself in a society. Yet, IR theories either describe the international society as relatively thin or deny its existence 2. In fact, IR theories nowadays has lost sight of its prevalence and describe as dominant the concept of security around which theories are built, thus leaving the concept of honor as a causal force 3. However, empirical evidence shows that neither denying the concept or minimizing its importance is adequate to understand certain aspects of state's behaviors. Also, leaders appear to value and pursue the status of their state even when it means reducing their material capacity or security. Kagan states that “nations...uphold other conceptions of honor...that are the product not of calculation but of
SciencesPo Paris Campus de Menton Foreign Policy Making in the Middle East
Research Paper
Subject :
« The Concept of Honor in International Relations : the personalization of the state »
INTRODUCTION
“Political units have their amour-propre, as people do” Raymond Aron.
As the Greeks understood better human motives, Socrate in his Republic identifies three psychic drives: spirit, appetite and reason. Socrate attributes many vigorous and competitive characteristics to “thumos” (known as the spirit), but most importantly he tells us that by surpassing or equalling the skills of people we praise in our societies, we build self-esteem and earn the respect of others. The spirit desires all sorts of victories, thus achieving honor. Following the Enlightenment, philosophical thinkers and social scientists have reduced reason to an instrument and appetite to a drive. All existing narratives of politics, if not of international relations, find their roots in appetite. Since Thucydides, Plato and Aristotle, and although manifested in different ways, the spirit's quest for self-esteem1 is universal. Studying the spirit as an important motive in international relations is a hard task because we assume that it can only express itself in a society. Yet, IR theories either describe the international society as relatively thin or deny its existence 2. In fact, IR theories nowadays has lost sight of its prevalence and describe as dominant the concept of security around which theories are built, thus leaving the concept of honor as a causal force 3. However, empirical evidence shows that neither denying the concept or minimizing its importance is adequate to understand certain aspects of state's behaviors. Also, leaders appear to value and pursue the status of their state even when it means reducing their material capacity or security. Kagan states that “nations...uphold other conceptions of honor...that are the product not of calculation but of