Band 18, Heft 1

Migration has been placed high on the agenda by the EU as being securitized related to policy changes as well as border security. Growing numbers of irregular migrants have paved the way for a systematic coordination and a consequent regional response in the region; therefore, dedicated security-based policies have been revised. This research analyzes the response that the EU put in action to the irregular migration due to the Arab Uprisings within the scope of collective securitization, and answers the question of why the EU has needed to respond to the demographic changes in the neighborhood as a supra-national securitizing actor. The empirical part of the research will be limited to the policy changes in the European Neighborhood Policy and the Schengen Agreement within the framework of institutional response between 2011 and 2015.

Is there global governance beyond the State? What kind of power emerges in a global arena? In contrast to the neorealist position, which stresses the role of states in the constitution of international power, many Foucauldian interpretations have emerged that emphasize the role of power networks that are constituted through an episteme. In this article I will focus on global governance through a Platonic notion of power and the relationship Plato establishes between the power of norms and rules. I argue that global governance should be understood as a network of power with different intermediations, based on a global constitution taken as a cognitive frame behind the international legal order. In this sense, new forms of power appear, and are different from the traditional state power activity, based on settled practices and norms. My main thesis is that there can be power without a clear ruler, but there is no power without rational order (based on norms, dispositions, and communicative intermediations), therefore, I examine which kind of rational order appears in global governance in accordance to Plato’s account of power and some remarks recently made by Byung-Chul Han.

Does dependency theory no longer offer an analytical and conceptual framework for the study of underdevelopment under the dynamics of modern globalization and the new international division of labor? Has the emergence of newly industrialized countries and a rising proportion of higher value-added manufacturing in the Global South cast the notions of subordination, peripherality, and dependence into the dustbin of history? These questions are today answered affirmatively by a broad consensus. In contrast to this widely-held assertion in the current development discourse, this study aims to bring these notions back to critical development studies by offering an up-to-date and analytically valid theorization of dependency in today’s Global South. Taking the historical-structural dependency perspective as a point of departure, the study revisits the notion of dependent development by drawing on a set of conceptual insights derived from Schumpeter’s theory of innovation, Global Value Chain analyses, and a class-relational articulation of the developmental state. In doing so, the study shows how core and periphery activities have clustered in time and space, leading to polarization in today’s global economy, and how new forms of dependency have been spatially reproduced along hierarchically-structured global value chains through the interplay of transnational corporations, states, and classes.