Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T21:30:38.893Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Narrating events and imputing those responsible: Reflexivity and the temporal basis of retrospective responsibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2018

Bernardo Teles Fazendeiro
Bernardo Teles Fazendeiro*
Affiliation:
Centre of Social Studies at the University of Coimbra
*
*Corresponding author. Email: btfazendeiro@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

By showing how a number of temporal assumptions shape three mutually exclusive narratives, the article argues for a mediated and reflexive understanding of events, one that is more open and less likely to fall into the pitfalls of a confrontation between different versions of retrospective responsibility. The article begins by looking beyond the agency and structure debate and into the temporal dimension of narrative, mainly for the sake of understanding the relationship between continuity and change. The article covers three potential narratives, focusing on their influence on the study of events, policy, and retrospective responsibility. It then illustrates their impact on mainstream understandings of the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014. Upon describing the problems of positing strict continuity and change, both of which impact accounts of retrospective responsibility, the outline of a more reflexive, mediated approach to events and temporality is introduced, based on Hans-Georg Gadamer’s hermeneutics. In doing so, the article demonstrates the disadvantages of Erlebnis, an approach that unreflexively applies a limited set of temporal assumptions, highlighting instead the advantages of Erfahrung, an approach that strives for a mediated understanding of events.

Keywords

ReflexivityTemporalityAgency; StructureResponsibilityNarrative
Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 161 - 180
Copyright
© British International Studies Association 2018 

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 Berenskoetter, Felix, ‘Reclaiming the vision thing: Constructivists as students of the future’, International Studies Quarterly, 55:3 (2011), pp. 647–668 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McIntosh, Christopher, ‘Theory across time: the privileging of time-less theory in international relations’, International Theory, 7:3 (2015), pp. 464–500 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 McIntosh, ‘Theory across time’, p. 466.

3 Hom, Andrew, ‘Hegemonic metronome: the ascendancy of Western standard time’, Review of International Studies, 36:4 (2010), pp. 1145–1170 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Berenskoetter, ‘Reclaiming the vision thing’, pp. 647–68; Solomon, Ty, ‘Time and subjectivity in world politics’, International Studies Quarterly, 58:4 (2014), pp. 671–681 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McIntosh, ‘Theory across time’, pp. 464–500; Hom, Andrews and Steele, Brent J., ‘Open horizons: the temporal visions of reflexive realism’, International Studies Review, 12:2 (2010), pp. 271–300 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Hutchings, Kimberly, Time and World Politics: Thinking the Present (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2008), pp. 30–34 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Ish-Shalom, Piki, ‘Time is politics: Temporalising justifications for war and the political within moral reasoning’, Journal of International Relations and Development, 19:1 (2016), pp. 126–152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hom, Andrew, ‘Angst springs eternal: Dangerous times and the dangers of timing the “Arab Spring”’, Security Dialogue, 47:2 (2016), pp. 165–183 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 On reflexivity in IR theory, see Neufeld, Mark, ‘Reflexivity and International Relations theory’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 22:1 (1993), pp. 53–76 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Guzzini, Stefano, ‘A reconstruction of constructivism in international relations’, European Journal of International Relations, 6:2 (2000), pp. 147–182 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ackerly, Brooke and True, Jacqui, ‘Reflexivity in practice: Power and ethics in feminist research on international relations’, International Studies Review, 10:4 (2008), pp. 693–707 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ish-Shalom, Piki, ‘Theorizing politics, politicizing theory, and the responsibility that runs between’, Perspectives on Politics, 7:2 (2009), pp. 303–316 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hamati‐Ataya, Inanna, ‘The “problem of values” and International Relations scholarship: From applied reflexivity to reflexivism’, International Studies Review, 13:2 (2011), pp. 259–287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ish-Shalom, Piki, ‘Theoreticians’ obligation of transparency: When parsimony, reflexivity, transparency and reciprocity meet’, Review of International Studies, 37:3 (2011), pp. 973–996 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Levine, Daniel, Recovering International Relations: The Promise of Sustainable Critique (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Amoreux, Jack, A Practice of Ethics for Global Politics: Ethical Reflexivity (London: Routledge, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Amoureux, Jack L. and Steele, Brent J. (eds), Reflexivity and International Relations: Positionality, Critique and Practice (London: Routledge, 2016)Google Scholar; Fazendeiro, Bernardo Teles, ‘Rethinking roles: Reflexive role ascription and performativity in international relations’, International Studies Review, 3:1 (2016), pp. 487–507 Google Scholar.

7 For a sample of the agency versus structure debate in IR, see Wendt, Alexander, ‘The agent-structure problem in International Relations theory’, International Organization, 41:3 (1987), pp. 335–370 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hollis, Martin and Smith, Steve, Explaining and Understanding International Relations (London: Clarendon Press, 1990)Google Scholar, Carlsnaes, Walter, ‘The agency-structure problem in foreign policy analysis’, International Studies Quarterly, 36:3 (1992), pp. 245–270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Friedman, Gil and Starr, Harvey, Agency, Structure and International Politics: From Ontology to Empirical Inquiry (London: Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar; Hopf, Ted, ‘The promise of constructivism in International Relations theory’, International Security, 23:1 (1998), pp. 171–200 Google Scholar; Bieler, Andreas and Morton, David, ‘The Gordian Knot of agency–structure in international relations: a neo-Gramscian perspective’, European Journal of International Relations, 7:1 (2001), pp. 5–35 Google Scholar; Wight, Colin, Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Gadamer, Hans-Georg, Truth and Method (London: Bloomsbury, 2013)Google Scholar.

9 Sewell, William H. Jr, ‘Three temporalities: Toward an eventful sociology’, in J. McDonald Terrence (ed.), The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996), p. 247 Google Scholar.

10 Gerschenkron, Alexander, ‘On the concept of continuity in history’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106:4 (29 June 1962), p. 196 Google Scholar.

11 For further understandings of change and continuity, see Nisbet, Robert, Social Change and History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970)Google Scholar.

12 On temporality and contingency in IR, see McIntosh, ‘Theory across time’, pp. 464–500. On a telling and detailed study of agency in IR, see Wight, Agents, Structures and International Relations, pp. 177–225.

13 Specific physical, social, and/or legal impediments may prevent a person from having moral agency.

14 Erskine, Toni, ‘Making sense of “responsibility” in international relations: Key questions and concepts’, in Toni Erskine (ed.), Can Institutions Have Responsibilities? Collective Moral Agency and International Relations (London: Palgrave, 2003), p. 8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Erskine, ‘Making sense of “responsibility” in international relations’, p. 8.

16 Waltz, Kenneth, Theory of International Politics (Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1979), p. 68 Google Scholar.

17 Somers, Margaret, ‘The narrative constitution of identity: a relational and network approach’, Theory and Society, 23:5 (1994), p. 616 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Scholes, Robert, ‘Afterthoughts on narrative language, narrative, and anti-narrative’, Critical Inquiry, 7:1 (1980), p. 209 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Ricoeur, Paul, Time and Narrative, Volume I (London: University of Chicago Press, 1990), pp. 65–66 Google Scholar.

20 Griffin, Larry, ‘Narrative, event-structure analysis, and causal interpretation in historical sociology’, American Journal of Sociology, 98:5 (1993), p. 1098 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Somers, ‘The narrative constitution of identity’, pp. 613–14.

22 Ish-Shalom, ‘Theoreticians’ obligation of transparency’, pp. 973–96.

23 See Nisbet, Social Change and History and Hutchings, Time and World Politics, for other ways of conceiving the time of politics.

24 Sewell Jr, ‘Three temporalities’, p. 247.

25 Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Free Press, 1992)Google Scholar; Wendt, Alexander, ‘Why a world state is inevitable?’, European Journal of International Relations, 9:4 (2003), pp. 491–542 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Benjamin, Walter, ‘Theses on the philosophy of history’, in Hannah Arendt (ed.), Illuminations (Schocken Books: New York, 1968 [orig. pub. 1940]), pp. 253–264 Google Scholar.

27 Carothers, Thomas, ‘The end of transition paradigm’, Journal of Democracy, 31:1 (2002), p. 6 Google Scholar.

28 Ibid., p. 10.

29 Arendt, Hannah, On Revolution (Penguin, 1990), p. 55 Google Scholar.

30 Not all Marxists are strict determinists, nor is it consensual that Marx himself was a historical determinist. See a brief rendering over how to understand Marx and its adherence to structure in Ashley, Richard, ‘The poverty of neorealism’, International Organization, 38:2 (1984), pp. 225–286 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Lenin, Vladimir, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism (London: Penguin, 2010 [orig. pub. 1916])Google Scholar.

32 Sewell Jr, ‘Three temporalities’, pp. 258–9.

33 Georgi Plekhanov, ‘On the Role of the Individual in History’, available at: {https://www.marxists.org/archive/plekhanov/1898/xx/individual.html} accessed 10 August 2017.

34 On Bolshevik thinking and their ideas of vanguard, see Ulam, Adam, The Bolsheviks: The Intellectual and Political History of the Triumph of Communism in Russia (Harvard: Harvard University Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

35 Wendt, ‘The agent-structure problem in International Relations theory’, pp. 335–70; Lewis Gaddis, John, ‘International Relations theory and the end of the Cold War’, International Security, 17:3 (1993), pp. 5–58 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rey Koslowski and Friedrich Kratochwil, ‘Understanding change in international politics: the Soviet Empire’s demise and the international system’, International Organization, 48:2 (1994), pp. 215–47; Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn, ‘International norm dynamics and political change’, International Organization, 52:4 (1998), pp. 887–917 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hopf, ‘The promise of constructivism in International Relations theory’, pp. 171–200.

36 Kratochwil, Friedrich, ‘History, action and identity: Revisiting the “second” great debate and assessing its importance for social theory’, European Journal of International Relations, 12:1 (2006), p. 10 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 See, for example, Hans Morgenthau’s six principles of realism in: Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (London: McGraw-Hill, 1993), pp. 4–16.

38 Gilpin, Robert, War and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), p. 7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Waltz, Theory of International Politics, p. 97.

40 Waltz, Kenneth, ‘Structural realism after the Cold War’, International Security, 25:1 (2000), p. 39 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Waltz, Kenneth, Man, State and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001 [orig. pub. 1959]), pp. 237–238 Google Scholar, emphasis added.

42 For theories that underscore the role of contingency, see Walker, Rob, Insider/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wendt, Alexander, ‘Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics’, International Organization, 46:2 (1992), pp. 391–425 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fierke, Karin, Changing Games, Changing Strategies: Critical Investigations in Security (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998)Google Scholar; Jackson, Patrick, ‘Making sense of making sense: Configurational analysis and the double hermeneutic’, in D. Yanow and P. Schwartz-Shea (eds), Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn (London: Routledge, 2006), pp. 264–280 Google Scholar.

43 Hopf, Ted, ‘The promise of constructivism in International Relations theory’, International Security, 23:1 (1998), pp. 171–200 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 Cox, Robet, ‘Social forces, states and world orders: Beyond International Relations theory’, Millennium, 10:2 (1981), pp. 126–155 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 See a detailed synthesis of this debate in Shapcott, Richard, Justice, Community and Dialogue in International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 53–129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Hutchings, Time and World Politics, p. 78.

47 Ibid., p. 58.

48 Arendt, Hannah, The Human Condition (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1958), p. 177 Google Scholar.

49 Benjamin, ‘Theses on the philosophy of history’, p. 261.

50 The premises of these theories are central to the practice turn in IR. From a broader, non-IR perspective into the pretheoretical bases of phenomena, see Thrift, Nigel, Non-Representational Theory: Space, Politics, Affect (London: Routledge, 2008)Google Scholar.

51 Pouliot, Vincent, ‘The logic of practicality: a theory of practice of security communities’, International Organization, 62:2 (2008), pp. 260–261 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52 Pouliot, ‘The logic of practicality’, p. 261.

53 Wydra, Harald, Communism and the Emergency of Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), p. 8 Google Scholar.

54 Ibid., p. 34.

55 English, Robert, Russia and the Idea of the West (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), p. 7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 Gilpin, War and Change in World Politics, p. 39.

57 Ibid.

58 For a comprehensive of the many aspects of reflexivity, see Jack L. Amoureux and Brent J. Steele, ‘Introduction’, in Amoureux and Steele (eds), Reflexivity and International Relations, pp. 1–20.

59 Hamati-Ataya, ‘The “problem of values”’, pp. 259–87; Teles Fazendeiro, ‘Rethinking roles’, pp. 487–507.

60 Amoreux, A Practice of Ethics for Global Politics, p. 19.

61 Shapcott, Justice, Community and Dialogue in International Relations, pp. 130–208; Shapcott, Richard, ‘Conversation and coexistence: Gadamer and the interpretation of international society’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 23:1 (1994), pp. 57–83 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dallmyr, Fred, Integral Pluralism: Beyond Cultural Wars (Lexington: University of Kentucky, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

62 Eroukhmanoff, Clara and Teles Fazendeiro, Bernardo, ‘Emotions and time: Approaching emotions through a fusion of horizons’, in Maeva Clement and Eric Sangar (eds), Research Emotions in International Relations (London: Palgrave, 2017), pp. 255–276 Google Scholar.

63 Shapcott, Justice, Community and Dialogue in International Relations, p. 140.

64 Odysseos, Louiza, The Subject of Coexistence (London: University Minnesota Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Pettman, Ralph, Intending the World: A Phenomenologly of International Affairs (Melbourne: Melbourne University Publishing, 2008)Google Scholar; Jacobi, Daniel, ‘“To the things themselves” … and back! International political sociology and the challenge of phenomenology’, International Political Sociology, 5:1 (2011), pp. 87–105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Gadamer’s theories, particularly his concern with fusing different horizons of understanding, have also been applied to IR. See, for example, Shapcott, ‘Conversation and coexistence’, pp. 57–83; Farrands, Chris, ‘Gadamer’s enduring influence in International Relations: Interpretation in Gadamer, Ricoeur and beyond’, in Cerwyn Moore and Chris Farrands (eds), International Relations Theory and Philosophy: Interpretive Dialogues (London: Routledge), pp. 33–45 Google Scholar.

65 Grondin, Jean, Introduction to Philosophical Hermeneutics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), p. 93 Google Scholar.

66 Grondin, Introduction to Philosophical Hermeneutics, p. 8.

67 Gadamer, Truth and Method , p. 56.

68 Ibid., p. 40.

69 Tickner, J. Ann, ‘What is your research program? Some feminist answers to International Relations methodological questions’, International Studies Quarterly, 49:1 (2005), p. 5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 Gadamer, Truth and Method, p. 282.

71 Ibid., p. 366.

72 Ibid., p. 305.

73 Levine, Recovering International Relations, p. 232.

74 Daniel Levine, ‘Between “late style” and sustainable critique: Said, Adorno and the Israel-Palestine conflict’, in Amoureux and Steele (eds), Reflexivity and International Relations.

75 Hutchings, Time and World Politics, p. 173.

76 See Gibson, Andrew, Towards a Postmodern Theory of Narrative (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1996)Google Scholar and Lloyd, Genevieve, Being in Time: Selves and Narrators in Philosophy and Literature (London: Routledge, 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

77 Hutchings, Time and World Politics, p. 173.

78 For more context, see Sakwa, Richard, Frontline Ukraine (London: I. B. Tauris, 2015)Google Scholar.

79 Mearsheimer, John, ‘Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s fault’, Foreign Affairs, 93:5 (2014), pp. 77–89 Google Scholar.

80 Anne Applebaum, ‘War in Europe is not a hysterical idea’, Washington Post (29 August 2014), available at: {http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/anne-applebaum-war-in-europe-is-nota-hysterical-idea/2014/08/29/815f29d4-2f93-11e4-bb9b-997ae96fad33_story.html} accessed 28 March 2015; Madeleine Albright, ‘United front: Foreign policy’, Foreign Policy (4 September 2014), available at: {http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/09/04/a-united-front/} accessed 23 March 2015; Peter Rutland, ‘A paradigm shift in Russia’s foreign policy’, Moscow Times, available at: {http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/a-paradigm-shift-in-russia-s-foreign-policy/500352.html} accessed 15 October 2015; Dmitri Trenin, ‘The crisis in Crimea could lead the world into a second Cold War’, The Guardian (2 March 2014), available at: {http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/02/crimea-crisis-russia-ukraine-cold-war} accessed 6 April 2014.

81 Laruelle, Marlene, ‘The three colors of Novorossiya, or the Russian nationalist mythmaking of the Ukrainian crisis’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 32:1 (2016), p. 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

82 Freudenstein, Roland, ‘Facing up to the bear: Confronting Putin’s Russia’, European View, 13:2 (2014), p. 227 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

83 Angela Merkel underscored the irrationality of Putin’s endeavour. Peter Baker, ‘Pressure rising as Obama works to rein in Russia’, The New York Times (2 March 2015), available at: {https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/03/world/europe/pressure-rising-as-obama-works-to-rein-in-russia.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=0} accessed 20 July 2017. Some analysts replicated this view by underscoring the rash, seemingly unpredictable nature of Putin’s style of rule. See, for example, George Will, ‘Vladimir Putin’s Hitlerian mind’, National Review (3 September 2014), available at: {http://www.nationalreview.com/article/386990/vladimir-putins-hitlerian-mind-george-will} accessed 20 July 2017.

84 On the frosty and conflictual relations between Russia and the ‘West’, see Stent, Angela E., The Limits of Partnership: U.S.-Russian Relations in the Twenty-First Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014)Google Scholar; Sakwa, Frontline Ukraine.

85 Trenin, ‘The crisis in Crimea’.

86 Ibid.

87 Dmitri Trenin, ‘Ukraine and the new divide’, Carnegie Moscow Center (July 2014), available at: {http://carnegieendowment.org/files/Article_Ukraine_Trenin_Eng_Jul2014.pdf} accessed 18 July 2017.

88 Trenin, ‘The crisis in Crimea’.

89 See the following references to a ‘new’ Cold War and a ‘new’ Great Game: Trenin, ‘Ukraine and the new divide’; Anne Applebaum, ‘The new Cold War’, Slate (8 February 2015), available at: {http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/saving_ukraine_and_stopping_vladimir_putin_the_west_needs_a_long_term_strategy.html} accessed February 2015; Trenin, ‘The crisis in Crimea’; Samuel Charap and Jeremy Shapiro, ‘Consequences of a new Cold War’, Survival, 57:2 (2015), pp. 37–46; Robert Levgold, ‘Managing the new Cold War: What Moscow and Washington can learn from the last one’, Foreign Affairs (July to August 2014), pp. 74–84; Kroenig, Matthew, ‘Facing reality: Getting NATO ready for a new Cold War’, Survival, 57:1 (2015), pp. 49–70 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

90 For critiques of the Cold War and Great Game, both ‘new’ and ‘old’, see Booth, Ken, ‘Cold wars of the mind’, in Ken Booth (ed.), Statecraft and Security: The Cold War and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Edwards, Matthew, ‘The “new” Great Games and the new great gamers: Disciples of Kipling and Mackinder’, Central Asian Survey, 22:1 (2003), pp. 83–102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Heathershaw, John and Megoran, Nick, ‘Contesting danger: a new agenda for policy and scholarship on Central Asia’, International Affairs, 87:3 (2011), pp. 589–612 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sakwa, Richard, ‘The cold peace: Russo-Western relations as a mimetic Cold War’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 26:1 (2013), pp. 203–224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Monaghan, Andrew, ‘A “New Cold War”? Abusing History, Misunderstanding Russia’, Russia and Eurasia Programme (London: Chatham House, 2015)Google Scholar.

91 See, for example, ‘Hilary Clinton says Vladimir Putin’s Crimea cccupation echoes Hitler’, Guardian (6 March 2014), available at: {https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/06/hillary-clinton-says-vladimir-putins-crimea-occupation-echoes-hitler} accessed 28 August 2017.

92 Albright, ‘United front’.

93 See interview with Robert Levgold and Dmitri Trenin in Ekaterina Zabrovskaya, ‘Legvold and Trenin: How to fix the US-Russian relationship’, Russia Direct (7 March 2015), available at: {http://www.russia-direct.org/qa/legvold-and-trenin-how-fix-us-russian-relationship} accessed 24 July 2017.

94 Kroenig, ‘Facing reality’, p. 53.

95 Heisbourg, François, ‘Preserving post-Cold War Europe’, Survival, 57:1 (2015), pp. 31–48 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sakwa, Frontline Ukraine, pp. 1–49.

96 Mearsheimer, ‘Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s fault’, p. 8.

97 Mearsheimer, John, ‘Back to the future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War’, International Security, 15:1 (1990), p. 10 Google Scholar.

98 Mearsheimer, John, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (London: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001), pp. 30–31 Google Scholar.

99 Hom and Steele, ‘Open horizons’, pp. 271–300.

100 Mearsheimer, ‘Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s fault’, pp. 4–5.

101 Ibid., pp. 1–2.

102 Ibid., p. 10.

103 Ibid.

104 John Mearsheimer, ‘Don’t arm Ukraine’, The New York Times (8 February 2015), available at: {https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/09/opinion/dont-arm-ukraine.html} accessed 18 July 2017.

105 See a critical survey of the complex motives which motivated Ukrainians during the Maidan crisis: Agnieszka Pikulicka-Wilczewska and Richard Sakwa (eds), Ukraine and Russia: People, Politics, Propaganda and Perspectives (2015), available at: {http://www.e-ir.info/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Ukraine-and-Russia-E-IR.pdf} accessed March 2015; Wood, Elizabeth A., Pomeranz, William E., Marry, E. Wayne, and Trudolyubov, Maxim, Roots of Russia’s War in Ukraine (New York: Columbia University Press, 2015)Google Scholar; Samokhvalov, Vsevolod, ‘Ukraine between Russia and the European Union: Triangle revisited’, Europe-Asia Studies, 67:9 (2015), pp. 1371–1393 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Onuch, Olga and Sasse, Gwendolyn, ‘The Maidan in movement: Diversity and the cycles of protest’, Europe-Asia Studies, 68:4 (2016), pp. 556–587 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kulyk, Volodymyr, ‘National identity in Ukraine: Impact of Euromaidan and the war’, Europe-Asia Studies, 68:4 (2016), pp. 588–608 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

106 Hutchings, Time and World Politics, p. 14.