As part of our weekly departmental seminar on Wednesday, October 29, Professor Antje Wiener presented a thought-provoking talk titled “The Contested Use of Staatsräson: Against the Backdrop of the Gaza Conflict.” She examined the evolving meaning and strategic use of Staatsräson in German political discourse since October 7, 2023. She began by noting that public debate around the attacks on Israel and Gaza has often been marked by a loss of Sprechfähigkeit – a collective inability to speak. Asking how we might still approach this topic “with the words we have,” Wiener identified Staatsräson as a case of a dormant norm that has been changed through a process of normative awakening. Yet, Wiener argues, this has not created meaning ‘on the norm’, leaving Staatsräson to be an empty signifier – strong sounding but with little concrete meaning. Nevertheless portrayed as a norm by political actors, it has become a political tool that silences and forecloses dialogue.
Wiener identified four interrelated preliminary findings: First, she presented how Staatsräson has become an empty signifier. Although Staatsräson is invoked as a norm – and as such should be socially constructed – it functions today as a political football that creates taboos and prevents critical engagement. It has become a norm in disguise, a non-norm. Second, Staatsräson has collided with international justice norms, notably the prosecution of war crimes by the ICC. In the face of this, the German government has privileged Staatsräson over international justice commitments – both of which have historically emerged from the Shoah. Third, the intensified use of Staatsräson has led to its replication across multiple sites, from judicative to legislative and international discourse. This created a “bundle” of associated terms such as “genocide” and “from the river to the sea,” adding new meanings and layers to the norm rather than offering meaning on it. 
Finally, and on a more general note, Wiener emphasized that only through sustained contestation and dialogue can a norm remain legitimate. She concludes that the discursive and strategic weaponization of Staatsräson has been used to shield political actors from legal scrutiny, underscoring the urgent need for politicians to understand how norms work and how they can enhance or reduce conflict.
Dear Antje, thank you a lot for your nuanced and inspiring talk and the open and through-provoking discussion!
 

The room was packed when Prof. Dr. Haim Yacobi kicked off this semester’s first departmental seminar on October 22 with his lecture titled “From Separation to a Shared Homeland – Notes on Settler-Colonial Urbansim(s) in Israel/Palestine”.

Drawing on decades of field research, the critical urban scholar elaborated on a neocolonial reading of mixed cities in Palestine/Israel, illustrating Palestinian contestations of urban spatial control and highlighting how these cities nonetheless constitute spaces of encounter and, therefore, potentially spaces for reconciliation and the transformation of inter-group relations.

Yacobi delineated how colonial planning – manifested in the moving of Jewish settlers – has been used as a tool of social, demographic, and spatial control by Israeli governments from 1948 until today. While different types of mixed cities exist, all underwent violent processes of apartheidization and frontierization in the past two decades.

 At the same time, occasionally the neo-liberal logic, unintendedly, triumphs over the ideology of segregation, e.g., when economically better-situated Palestinians (are able to) rent and buy property in Jewish parts and houses of East Jerusalem. Seen by the respective individuals as a way to improve their living standards, these acts circumvent the Israeli state’s desire to fully control cities and thus constitute a form of political protest.

The observation that even in segregated cities Jews and Arabs are neighbours and encounter each other daily, led Yacobi to argue that reconciliatory efforts should think beyond a one- or two-state solution and focus on urban settings, instead of leaving urban spaces out of official peace accords. Decolonisation that begins with urban spaces could look like shared Palestinian-Jewish municipalities and sub-municipalities, as well as shared management of heritage sites within these mixed cities. With a redefinition of Israeli power and state, the populations could move from separation to a shared-homeland paradigm, enabling a shared future.

Dear Haim, thank you so much for being with us and sharing your balanced, clear and hopeful perspective.

On Wednesday, 23 July 2025, the book launch of Transnational Infrastructures and the Transformation of Global Orders  took place as part of the IfP departmental seminar. The book, with several chapters from CIRP members, is edited by Hans-Jürgen Bieling, Thomas Diez, Riccarda Flemmer and Andrea Futterer and is an output from an interdisciplinary group of scholars from Tübingen, the University of Applied Forest Sciences Rottenburg and Zeppelin University in Friedrichshafen. 
Hans-Jürgen Bieling opened the event outlining the basic argument of infrastructures having global ordering effects. Thomas Diez argued that the emergence of new infrastructures and new technologies have enabled the formation of orders in international society. Anne Burkhardt examined the implications of AI for Global Justice. Riccarda Flemmer focused on Infrastructures and the Order of Global Resource Extractivism in Latin America, emphasising moments of resistance .
A lively debate and reception followed these insights into four of the book chapters.

From Thursday, June 24, to Saturday, June 26, a group of 27 students simulated a potential mediation of the current Sudanese conflict in the international forum Burg Liebenzell e.V., Bad Liebenzell. This excursion constituted the practical component of the seminar “Theories and Practices of Mediation”, offered by Dr. Gabi Schlag as part of the master’s programme for Peace Research and International Relations at the Institute for Political Science, Tübingen.

While the seminar focusses on current academic debates and research related to conflict mediation and transformation, the simulation aimed at giving students the opportunity to practically test their knowledge and competencies for managing and transforming a present and ongoing conflict.

The simulation was prepared over the previous course of the seminar. Each student was able to choose a role, either from the conflicting parties, external actors, civil society or the AU/UN mediation team. Conflict expertise was provided by Dr. Gerrit Kurtz from the SWP, who commendably agreed to join the seminar for an online session in June. Based on his insights and additional extensive research, the students prepared positions and strategies to navigate negotiations in the best interests of their respective actors (laid down in written form in position papers). The members of the mediation team had an outstanding role, as they not only had to investigate and understand the interests and positions of all actors involved, but also developed a structure on how to facilitate and organize the talks on the three days of mediation. 

Students and lecturers arrived in Bad Liebenzell around noon on Thursday. After a welcoming lunch, negotiations started with a formal round, where tensions and incompatibilities already surfaced. Further discussions in smaller groups quickly showed that negotiations of a ceasefire deal seemed far-off, provoking the EU’s representative to propose an externally monitored 24-hour humanitarian pause to prevent a deadlock. This ended up being the only agreement discussed over the subsequent days. Succeeding many bi- and multilateral negotiation rounds, some provocative and spoiling interventions from different actors as well as extensive scrutiny of each article contained in the document, the agreement on a 24-hour-humanitarian pause in designated regions in Sudan was signed by all parties present on late Saturday morning. 

Following a final lunch, participants set out to journey back to Tübingen. Independent from the actor they played, the excursion was seen as a positive experience, enriching individual understandings about (the dynamics of) mediation, negotiation and bargaining processes as well as having provided good training of personal negotiating skills for future careers.

Anna, playing the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of the EU, Kaja Kallas, for instance says: 
“Through the simulation, you learnt something about mediation in a way and mulitlayeredness that you don’t get from any textbook. It’s been a very strong learning experience.”

Her colleague Zoe, enacting Minni Minawi, Governor of Darfur and member of one of the two main warring delegations, the Sudanese Armed Forces, adds: “The entire project gave so much agency to the students. From the case-selection to the course of the mediation simulation, we were able to create, interpret and lead a lot. I greatly appreciated that.”
 

On July 9th, as part of our departmental seminar, Laura Sjoberg gave an talk titled "Sexual Relations as International Relations," examining the role of sex and sexuality in the making and regulation of state borders. She reminded us that borders are not fixed, but founded and reified by myths, arguing that the generation of state borders - indeed the state itself - cannot be fully understood without reference to sex acts and sexual relationships.

Laura Sjoberg introduced the concept of "consummated borders" to highlight how imperial marriages and sexual relationships have constituted borders both symbolically and materially. Using examples from dynastic marriage treaties - such as the 1659 Treaty of the Pyrenees of Louis XIV and Maria Theresa of Spain or the 1628 Ascension of Shah Jahan to the Mughal Throne - to contemporary asylum and migration policies, Laura Sjoberg showed how sexual acts and norms contribute to state-building, citizenship, and territorial control. Giving the example of Green Cards and same-sex marriages, which the US only legalized as late as 2015, she explained, ‘Who you are sleeping with defines whether you are allowed in a country.’

In conclusion, and turning around Spike Peterson's claim that "making states in making sex", Laura Sjoberg argued that "making sex is making states," positioning sexual relations as foundational to international relations.

On June 18, 2025,  we welcomed Dr. Nuri Ali Tahir (University Bursa / University Tübingen). He is currently visiting researcher at the University Tübingen and held a lecture titled "Cyprus Conundrum and EU Integration Efforts through the Green Line. Regulation: New Pattern for a Federal Solution in a Divided Island?”
He explained how Cyprus joined the EU as a divided island and pointed out the isolating effects to the Northern part of the Islands. In order to overcome this isolation and in order to give a constructive answer to the positive vote for reunification by the Turkish Cypriot community after the  2004 Annan referendum, the Green Line Regulation was established. This regulation manages the movement of people and goods but so far has not led to overcoming major problems on the island. Despite the Green Line (a UN bufferzone) being officially a ceasefire line, not a formal border, it is often treated as such.
The division of the island, the suspension of the acquis communitaire in the Northern part and the reluctance of recognition of institutions in the North by the South have created many barriers. As such, EU law is also used differently on the island. Turkish Cypriots are for example recognized as EU citizens, however they are excluded from several rights, such as freedom of movement, participation in EU elections, and access to EU social cohesion funds. The EU has tried to circumvent some of those forms of exclusion for example through providing aid packages to support the infrastructure in the North. The same pattern can be seen when looking at trade. Trade is managed via the Chamber of Commerce in the North and not the Ministry of Trade of the Northern Part since the Republic of Cyprus refrains from recognizing any official institutions.
Despite the Green Line Regulation being the main EU instrument in the region, its impact remains constrained without further amendments and political commitment. The different scope of EU law can still be seen in the everyday life, for example within higher education and the lack of Erasmus access for Northern students. The reasons for this ineffectiveness are mainly rooted in nationalism, which extends so far that even agricultural policies and consumer behavior obstruct cooperation.
Therefore, further amendments to the Green Line Regulation  are necessary in order to lay the foundation for cooperation.

On Wednesday, June 4 2025, another session of the MAPIR Career Talks took place.  
Founded in 2022, the Career Talks are a student-led initiative of the MAPIR-program. It aims at creating a space where current MAPIR-students can connect and exchange with alumni of the program to ask all the questions pertaining to the transition into professional life and career development. This time, two recently graduated alumni who forged their career paths into international organisations offered to share their insights with current cohorts. 
Encountering people who are ahead of you in a specific aspect of life can be incredibly helpful, inspiring and encouraging. This is particularly true, when one is still in the middle of an education that does not lead to a predefined profession – such as many master’s degrees in the social sciences. Around 18 students of the department of political science made this experience for themselves in another session of the MAPIR Career Talks that took place on June 4th. 
Sina Gussek and A-Young Kim both work on gender-related topics: Sina is currently seconded by the ZIF (Zentrum für internationale Friedenseinsätze) to the European External Action Service (EEAS) and A-Young Kim staffs the UNESCO in Cairo. In a bit more than an hour, both shared information on entryways to the respective organisation, their current work contexts and tasks as well as their personal professional journeys. In the subsequent Q&A session they answered current students’ questions ranging from the impact of current geopolitical tensions on international organisation’s work to the utility of their former coursework for their work, in very honest and lucid ways. Dear A-Young, dear Sina – it has truly been an honour and privilege to have you with us!
 

On Wednesday, 13 May 2025, we welcomed Dr. Dagmar Vorlíček in the seminar of Discourses of Security for a guest lecture about Infrastructure and Global Security. Vorlíček introduced the importance of infrastructure for understanding international politics and security, exploring what infrastructures are and how they shape – and are shaped by – political, economic, and social processes. Drawing on historical examples, such as colonial railways, Nazi Germany’s Reichsautobahn (highway) and the Manhattan Project, she highlighted how infrastructures have served as tools of colonial politics, identity politics and security politics. 
Then, Vorlíček turned to how infrastructures are theorized within International Relations, drawing on the work of Bueger et al. (2023), who identify three main analytical approaches. First, infrastructures can be understood as objects of politics, meaning they are shaped by political decisions and power struggles, and are used as tools to pursue political goals. Second, infrastructures can be seen as political forces in their own right. Once built, they do not simply serve political ends—they actively shape political processes. Third, the concept of infrastructuralism offers a broader theoretical vocabulary for studying how infrastructures organize global politics. This approach examines how infrastructures are created, maintained, and transformed by actors, and how they structure forms of power and sovereignty. 
Lastly, she connected infrastructures to a highly important topic namely, Global Health. Through the example of COVID-19 she showed how actors, previously not involved in health, began to engage in finding solutions. Along that process, those heterodox actors built new infrastructures, which consequently challenged the Liberal episteme of Global Health. After the talk, students from the seminar critically questioned Vorlíček’s approach and engaged in an insightful debate

On May 9, 2025, we welcomed Dr. Juliana Tappe Ortiz, the new postdoctoral researcher at the Chair of Peace and Conflict Studies. As part of the departmental seminar, she presented her research on the risks and perceptions surrounding social activism in conflict-affected Colombia. The talk focused on how women’s activism in civil society, particularly in secular versus religious movements, is viewed by communities and armed actors. Drawing from a long-standing tradition of social activism in Colombia, Dr. Ortiz highlighted how gendered power structures are reinforced through violence aimed at politically active women, especially when they challenge entrenched interests of armed actors.
Dr. Ortiz’s research, in collaboration with Julia Köbrich, is based on an original survey experiment (N=1000) using a 2x2x2 factorial design that investigates the role of armed actors, religious affiliation, and gender in shaping community support for activism. The preliminary results show that the presence of armed actors is a key variable influencing perceived danger of activist engagement. The second part of the talk addressed the political consequences of violence against women activists, drawing on a panel dataset covering municipal elections in Colombia between 2007 and 2019. Ortiz and her collaborators found that targeted killings of women activists lead to measurable declines in women’s political participation and votes for women candidates. However, former FARC-controlled regions showed the opposite trend, suggesting that alternative gender norms can shape different outcomes. Violence, Dr. Ortiz argued, is used strategically to signal that public and political spaces remain male-dominated.
In conclusion, Dr. Ortiz challenges prevailing narratives that focus only on women’s resilience or empowerment in the face of violence. Her work underscores that fear, internalized norms, and community-level responses often lead to long-term suppression of women’s political ambitions. The talk was a compelling contribution to ongoing debates about gender, violence, and political representation in conflict-affected societies, and marked an important step in her future research aimed at uncovering the hidden spaces of women’s resistance.

On April 23, 2025, we welcomed Andrey Makarychev (Professor of Regional Political Studies, University of Tartu). As part of our departmental seminar, he gave a lecture about EU-India relations. In the light of von der Leyen’s recent “strategic” visit to New Delhi, he pointed out the pragmatic, rational and depoliticized nature of the relationship.
Makarychev placed the rapprochement in the broader context of global political shifts, such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the influence of Trump-era diplomacy, and the fading of liberal international norms. He explored key political factors from both sides. For the EU, India’s hesitation to condemn Russia’s aggression has been a point of tension. However, the EU has accepted India’s position, with the EU signing the G20 declaration in 2023 without referencing the war in Ukraine and continuing to engage in relevant policy fields with India. For India, the China-factor is a crucial aspect and the ambiguity of the EU’s approach to China raises insecurities.
India’s approach reflects a shift toward amplifying the "Trumpist worldview” which becomes evident when calling the EU amongst others “not efficient” and “moralizing”. 
Makarychev also highlighted academic implications, particularly around postcolonial perspectives and the limits of democracy as a common value. For India, the Ukraine conflict is not viewed through a colonial lens due to a differing understanding of the term and dissimiliar and more positive memories of the Soviet era. Additionally, geopolitical considerations often overshadow ideological alignments, challenging the assumptions about democratic solidarity. For India, it is crucial to avoid an alliance between Russia and China, which heavily influences its engagement with Ukriane. Ultimately  Makarychev questioned the coherence of multipolarity, labeling it an “empty signifier” prone to strategic reinterpretation. For Russia, multipolarity equals different spheres of influence. If India follows this interpretation, remains to be seen. Additionally, the EU experiences a transformation from a “normative power” to a multivectoral power.
In conclusion, India’s rhetoric of neutrality masks deeper shifts, rooted in post-truth relativism, analogical reasoning (such as whataboutism), and economic reductionism. These tendencies reflect a broader trend toward illiberal or post-liberal foreign policy styles, where liberal values give way to technocratic action and transactional logic.

In early April 2025, 16 enthusiastic students had the chance of representing Albania at the National Model United Nations (NMUN) in New York City (April 6–10). The University of Tübingen delegation engaged in this diplomatic simulation to gain invaluable insights into international diplomacy and global governance. Their commitment across committees earned them the Distinguished Delegation Award, reflecting consistent excellence in participation, procedure, and collaboration. Furthermore, five pairs of delegates received Outstanding Position Paper Awards for their pre-conference briefs: Pascal & Kateryna (UNESCO); Fabian & Merle (OPCW); Mikhail & Joachim (GA1); Marie & Isaac (HRC); and Johannes & Fynn (GA3)

On January 29, 2025, we welcomed Volodymyr Dubovyk (Associate Professor and Director of the  Center for International Studies at Odesa I. I. Mechnikov National University, Ukraine and  Senior Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, Washington, D.C.). As part of our departmental seminar, he gave a lecture about ‘War and Peace: Can President Trump End Russian Aggression in Ukraine?’.
Talking about the US role during the war, Dubovyk contrasted Biden’s supportive rhetoric but limited aid with Trump’s unpredictable stance and past grievances with Ukraine. While Biden was in favour of supporting Ukraine ‘as long as it takes’, his administration was criticized in Ukraine for a lack of a clear strategy and delayed weapon deliveries. Considering Trump’s potential role in ending the war, however, Dubovyk expressed skepticism. Although Trump was the first U.S. president to provide Ukraine with small arms, and many in Ukraine are hopeful, Trump’s rhetorically very amicable stance towards Russia and Putin is undeniable. Thus, Dubovyk argued that Trump’s approach might be focused on achieving a formal resolution giving him credit for ending the war rather than ensuring long-term stability. On the one hand, this could also involve significant pressure on Ukraine to accept unfavourable terms due to their dependence on US arms and weaponry. On the other hand, Dubovyk argued that withdrawing support from Ukraine might result in a stronger Russia and a risk for the US to appear weak on the global stage. Dubovyk further elaborated on the challenges in negotiating a resolution, highlighting the starkly different positions held by Ukraine and Russia, especially regarding security guarantees. Thus, the complexity of the war makes a fast resolution impossible. Lastly, it also depends on how much ending the war is a priority for Trump.

On January 22, 2025, we had the pleasure of welcoming Dennis Schmidt (Durham University) for a guest lecture titled “The Relevance of International Law and Institutions in Times of Crises”. 
In order to explain the current ‘Crisis of International Law’, he resorted back to the history and development of international law. He emphasized that while international law comprises treaties and formal institutions established between states, it inherently lacks effective enforcement mechanisms. Adopting a sociological approach, Schmidt argued that international law extends beyond formal rules, functioning as a social ordering practice for states. Hence, the ongoing contestations of international law – ranging from protectionist practices in trade towards increasing human rights violations – show a deeper problem of the international order. Those contestations, often coming from the Global South, are opposing western-centrism and universality. This can be seen by the fact that numerous countries are opting out from international bodies and in some instances create own regional forms of order. However, the contestations are not limited to the Global South only.

Therefore, the continuous questioning of international law by various states underscores a legitimacy challenge within the global normative institutional arrangement. As such, this shows a larger problem of the international society since the crisis of international law is a struggle over the nature and moral purpose of the international order itself. 

On December 11, 2024, we gathered for the annual MAPIR Potluck Party, which is becoming a delightful tradition to celebrate the semester. True to the potluck idea—where everyone brings a dish to share—students, lecturers, and professors contributed a colorful variety of meals from around the world. With delicious food, lively conversations, and a wonderful sense of community, this event has become a cherished highlight of our program.

On December 4, 2024 we had the pleasure of welcoming Ebru Turhan (Turkish-German University, Istanbul). Her lecture on ‘Germany's Role in EU-Turkey Relations: A Status Quo Power?’, based on a study with Prof. Senem Aydın-Düzgit, examined Germany’s influence within the EU and the European neighbourhood. She analyzed Germany's positions and responses to the rule of law and fundamental rights violations in Turkey, arguing that Germany acts as a 'status quo power.' Germany only takes concrete government measures if it perceives a significant threat to its own interests or to order; or if adjusting to the status quo offers greater benefits.
Ebru Turhan identified a shift in the German behaviour from 2016 to 2020 and from 2020 to 2023. They find that, during the first period, Germany reacted more assertively to human rights violations in Turkey when it perceived a threat to its domestic order, a prominent example of which is when many German-Turkish Human Rights activists were imprisoned by Turkey. But, during the second period, Germany grew to be more cautious and even abstained when criticizing Turkey’s violations that did not pose a threat to its domestic politics, especially when Turkey was needed for maintaining European order, such as in the case of the EU-Turkey migration deal. In this time frame, the focus shifted to de-escalation and to a partial normalization of relations. They interpret this pattern as Germany preferring to preserve the status quo regarding the relationship between Germany/ the EU and Turkey. The study also has broader implications, especially for investigating the status quo power of Germany in relation to other strategic partners of the EU.

On November 27, 2024, we had the pleasure of welcoming Erica Resende (Brazilian War College, Rio de Janeiro). As part of our departmental seminar, she gave a presentation about ‘Military Thinking in Bolsonaro's Populist Foreign Policy.' The presentation was based on her contribution to the forthcoming Routledge Handbook of Populism and Foreign Policy. Resende explored several ideological elements that shaped the Brazilian military's worldview during the Cold War and demonstrated how these continue to influence Bolsonaro’s foreign policy. Key among these elements is the military’s longstanding anti-communist stance, which frames Brazil as a defending force against left-wing governments in Latin America. Equally important is the national-developmentalist relation, which is particularly evident in the military’s view of the Amazon as a vital resource for Brazil’s rise towards a ‘great power’. Next to the military, Evangelists and Agribusiness representatives support these populist ideas of Bolsonaro.
Resende argued that the military does not need to be an active player in foreign policy decisions; instead, it exerts influence through the deeply ingrained military thinking. She also linked this ideological framework to Bolsonaro’s populist self-presentation as both a military figure and a representative of the people. Ultimately, Resende emphasized that this military thinking has become a foundational ideology within Bolsonaro’s foreign policy.

On October 23, 2024, Mustapha Kamal Pasha (University of Aberystwyth) kindly accepted the invitation to the MAPIR Annual Lecture and held his presentation titled “IR, (De) Coloniality and the Present Conjuncture.” He started by questioning current understandings of time and temporality and argued that the presence has multiple layers, which is why no single perspective of IR can fully comprehend or explain the presence. A task for which a combination or conjuncture of viewpoints is necessary. Furthermore, the present events also showcase the contestation of the international system that is firmly understood according to lines of “sovereignty,” an understanding of sovereignty that has its origins in the West but yet overtook our perceptions of IR globally. Proposing an alternative, he turns to critical theories and the notion of “empire” that needs to be delinked from sovereignty. Still, he argued, critical studies have also not been immune to the same misguided understandings of modernity and the IR, making overcoming the problems with the present conjuncture difficult. Consequently, he proposed to either scale up or scale down the existing political systems in order to diminish the impact of sovereignty or to create a new contract.

On July 10, 2024, we welcomed Constantinos Adamides (University of Nicosia) and Ahmet Sözen (Eastern Mediterranean University) to an open panel discussion on the Cyprus conflict - No Hope for Resolution? The panel took place as part of the seminar 'Cyprus - a Conflict at the Crossroads' led by Thomas Diez. Sözen began the discussion by placing the Cyprus conflict in the broader global network of power shifts and conflicts and attributed the recent developments in Cyprus, among others, to emerging power vacuums that both sides try to exploit. In this context, he also spoke about the changing role of the UN on the island and the influence of the US elections. Adamides discussed the various options for resolving the conflict and how the dwindling hope for a quick and sustainable solution is leading to "voter fatigue" in Cyprus, as well as growing mistrust in the UN. Demographic change and the influence of Russia on the Turkish-Cypriot side further complicate the situation. Both spoke about the role of Greek-Turkish relations outside of the Cyprus conflict and the differences in the wishes of the Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot populations regarding a long-term solution. According to the two experts, a sustainable solution to the conflict is once again a long way off. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that there is no such thing as a 'real' frozen conflict, but that it continues to develop dynamically. 

On June 12, 2024, we had the pleasure of welcoming Dr. Flavia Guerra Cavalcantito, Associate Professor at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and currently a postdoctoral Global Encounters fellow at Tübingen University, to our Departmental Seminar. She gave insights into her research on “Ocean Thinking and the Critique of the Modern Territorial Imagination in International Relations”. Guerra Cavalcantito started her lecture by unveiling the binaries used to divide Land and Sea, with the Land being associated with sovereignty and civilization, while the Sea is seen as a place of anarchy, danger or as a non-place. She then applied Carl Schmitt’s “Der Nomos der Erde” and “Land und Meer” to show that the Ocean is perceived as a space that cannot be controlled, as boundaries cannot sustain on a liquid, moving surface. She argues that traditional IR theories are unable to consider the Ocean as an agent in its own right and thus as a place of knowledge production, instead falling back on terrestrial imagination that views the Sea as an object that can be extracted and conquered. Wet ontology and more-than-wet ontology, however, offer a way out by asserting that the ocean helps us rethink space, time, movement and our way of being in the world. While Guerra Cavalcantito maintains there are overlaps between wet ontology and poststructuralism, she criticizes poststructuralism for its fixation on land and language. She followed her theoretical argument with several examples which demonstrated that the land and sea divide in IR needs to be questioned for the Ocean to become a subject in its own right.

On May 8, 2024, we had the pleasure of welcoming Fabienne Bossuyt from Ghent University to our Departmental Seminar. Fabienne gave a lecture on “The subaltern strikes back, or how Ukraine is claiming agency from Russia and the EU," based on the article she is currently working on. Bossuyt discusses how Ukraine, long perceived as a “little brother” by Russia and having its "Europeanness" questioned by the EU, has begun to assert its agency. Traditionally seen as a mute subaltern, Ukraine has shifted its narrative to claim a distinct political identity. The article uses a postcolonial framework to explore how Ukraine, as a "double subaltern," has subverted dominant representations and hierarchies of power. Moreover, it employs critical security studies to discuss how the country’s ontological security narrative has transformed, moving from hybrid to marginal liminality, and potentially to claiming fuller agency. Bossuyt argues that Ukraine's forceful resistance against Russia and the EU's internalisation of Ukraine's discourse on the invasion exemplify its emerging agency. However, she concludes that while Ukraine has made significant progress, it remains in a state of marginal liminality, still navigating its position. The panel was followed by a lively Q&A session, the discussion raised questions about the mainstream IR’s ability to fully capture shifts in agency, the persistent state of liminality within Ukraine, the broader implications of attributing subalternity to states, and the ongoing societal fatigue within the EU concerning the invasion of Ukraine.

On December 6 2023, we had the pleasure of welcoming Pınar Bilgin from Bilkent University, Ankara, to our Departmental Seminar. She gave a lecture on "Thinking Globally about (the Study of) Security", on which she is currently working for a book with Karen Smith. She began by highlighting the Eurocentric limitations in which International Relations Studies find themselves trapped. These Eurocentric tendencies have been discussed for over 30 years, but the breadth of information from the Global South is still largely not utilised. Bilgin cited various examples from the literature, such as Said, Spivak and Mignolo, to support her thesis and argued that thinking globally necessarily entails reading 'globally'. Critical Security Studies is confronted with the same limitations. Using examples from security policy, she presented three central dynamics: the relationship of  'Self' and 'Other', the material dislocation of resources and the lack of knowledge about 'multiple beginnings' (learning). According to Bilgin, the discussion about Eurocentrism is not about situatedness, but about constituted effects.

On November 20, 2023, we had the pleasure of welcoming Michał Krzyżanowski as our guest speaker at the Departmental Seminar. As one of the leading international scholars in critical discourse studies, Krzyżanowski’s lecture concerning the discourses and practices of the “New Normal”: Crisis, The Far-Right & the Normalisation of Anti- and Post‑Democratic Action" explored the very specific details of his work. Michał touched upon various current developments in Europe – the wave of far-right in Eastern Europe which is now developing even more in Western Europe. By bringing up examples of the Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom, and a case study of Sweden, he introduced the idea of normalisation as a political concept, the discursive shifts, linearity and oscillation logic in normalisation processes, the issue of moral panics, the concept of borderline discourse and conceptual flipsiding, among others. Moreover, Michał also discussed how politicians construct and utilise proxy discourses, for example, the “again” discourse and the typically “utopian” vision of countries in the past. He highlighted the importance of considering where exactly the voices of such discourses come from. According to Krzyżanowski, connecting discourse to practice in normalisation research theoretically and empirically should focus on wider social ontology and anchorage of illiberal ideologies on the one hand, and political mainstreaming of the far-right on the other. He highlighted that normalisation is not just a rhetorical ‘by-product’, but a discursive political strategy which supports the illiberal dismantling of liberal democracies.

On November 8, 2023, we welcomed Prof. Annika Björkdahl from Lund University, Sweden, to our Departmental Seminar. She gave a lecture on "The Spatial Turn in Peace & Conflict Studies: Peacebuilding, Agency and Knowledge". Björkdahl began by discussing the significance of the spatial turn, which shows that the organization of space has a significant influence on the structure and function of peace and war. The spatial approach poses the question of "where" peace takes place, which also goes hand in hand with questions of belonging and a new understanding of peace, away from its state-centric definition. She then presented some personal research examples, such as the Sarajevo Roses, the buffer zone in Cyprus or the Bosnian Day of Remembrance. In all of these "places", she was particularly interested in how (im)material legacies of conflict are transformed into places and spaces of peace.  Knowledge production also plays a central role here, influencing peace and peacebuilding with its epistemic power. Peace must be understood as "situated knowledge".

On the 25th of October, as part of the MAPIR Keynote 2023, Dr. habil. Simone Wisotzki from the Peace Research Institute Frankfurt gave a lecture “Is Feminist Foreign Policy Just Another Label? How To Realize a Gender-Just Peace.” During the panel, she talked about the reasons why states choose Feminist Foreign Policies (FFP), gender blindness and male domination in the decision-making processes. Dr. habil. Wisotzki also touched upon feminism broadly, concentrating on the intersectional way of understanding feminism. Countries following the FFPs were presented and compared to each other, moreover, there was an extensive presentation and critique of Germany’s FFP features. Dr. habil. Wisotzki also brought up the Women, Peace and Security agenda and compared it to the FFP, discussing their successes and the main differences between these two major strategies. Lastly, she highlighted the idea of theorising feminist peace – peace from a gender perspective, and violence from a feminist perspective (the “continuum of violence”). Dr. habil. Wisotzki raised the question of whether these theories can help the discourse or if they are merely labels. The panel was followed by a lively Q&A session, with questions concerning the ideological background of FFP, different types of feminism, Germany’s arms export to Ukraine in context with FFP, the issue with the budget dedication to gender-sensitive subjects, etc.

On July 5, 2023, we had the pleasure of welcoming Senem Aydın-Düzgit as our guest speaker at the Departmental Seminar. Aydın-Düzgit, a distinguished Professor of International Relations at Sabancı University and Senior Scholar and Research Coordinator at the Istanbul Policy Center, delivered an enlightening lecture entitled “The Resilience of Authoritarian Populism: Lessons from Turkey's Pivotal Elections.”

During her presentation, Professor Aydın-Düzgit provided valuable insights into the persistent resilience of populistic authoritarian governments. She began by contextualizing the elections, outlining the party structures and presenting detailed information about the election results. Exploring how the Turkish government, despite facing multiple crises prior to the elections, maintained its resilience, she highlighted several key factors. These included the government's capture of state and market mechanisms, its skillful employment of post-truth politics, and the deep polarization existing within the country. Aydın-Düzgit also drew attention to the government's narrative surrounding the economy, its shift towards nationalism, and the emergence of techno-nationalism in Turkey. Furthermore, she emphasized that Turkey's expanding relations with nations worldwide signify a diminishing leverage of the West over the country.

The thought-provoking talk concluded with a summary of the lessons gleaned from the recent elections – the need for the severance of nationalism, the curious role of the conflicts that are surrounding Turkey and the significance of the geopolitical stance adopted by the Turkish government. The panel was followed by a plethora of questions from the audience, expanding on a variety of topics, including the role of legitimacy in Erdogan’s strategy, the gender issue, the potential of opposition, the diaspora’s role in the elections, etc.

On 30 January 2023, we welcomed Maria Hadjipavlou (University of Cyprus) and Ahmet Sözen (Eastern Mediterranean University), to an open panel debate “Conflict Resolution in Cyprus: Where To?”. The panel was part of the seminar “Cyprus: A Conflict at the Crossroads”, led by Thomas Diez. The speakers discussed the current situation in Cyprus and evaluated it by bringing forward the recent events that have predominantly influenced the deadlock of the negotiations. The guests shared the insights gathered through years of work with Track II, the UN, and civil society. While discussing the plausibility of future negotiations, the speakers engaged with the topics of blame-game as one of the policy methods for each of the sides; the so-called “recognition paranoia” and the concept of engagement without recognition. One of the main distinctions of the panel was the fact that the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot perspectives were both represented. Hadjipavlou and Sözen shared hope in the young generation of both sides, however, there was doubt about whether its potential is enough for conflict resolution. The panel was followed by a plethora of questions from the audience, expanding on a variety of topics, including the role of civil society, peace education, the upcoming elections in Cyprus and Turkey, ontological security, gender lens etc.

On 25 January 2023, we were honoured to welcome Ayşe Zarakol as our guest speaker at the Departmental Seminar. Professor of International Relations at the University of Cambridge and a leading figure in the field, Zarakol presented her book ‘Before the West: The Rise and Fall of Eastern World Orders’. In this book, she challenges the conventional Western-centric view of history in international relations scholarship and offers a new interpretation of the historical trajectory of Eastern world orders and their interactions with the West. Through her examination of three Eurasian world orders, Zarakol shows that the concept of sovereignty was not unique to early modern Europe, as it had existed in Asia prior to the establishment of the Westphalian order. Her meta-historical account of these world orders also considered environmental and structural factors, such as pandemics, climate change and population shifts, as contributing factors to their decline rather than focusing solely on internal political dynamics. Zarakol's engaging lecture offered a fresh perspective on the history of international thought and encouraged us to rethink some fundamental concepts and debates in IR. 

On 18 January 2023, we welcomed Jochen Kleinschmidt, post-doctoral fellow at the Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, to our Departmental Seminar. He continued the lecture series after the Christmas break with the topic of "Retrofuturistic Realism: The Theoretical Aestheticization of Great Power Competition". He defined Retrofuturistic Realism as an aestheticisation in which the present is interpreted as the fulfilment of those Realist prophecies that predicted a post-Cold War power struggle between the Great Powers. In order to explain this concept, the term 'restorative nostalgia' and the growing importance of the concept of time in International Relations were discussed, before Dr Kleinschmidt then presented publications by various Realist scholars and elaborated on their Retrofuturistic tendencies. For instance, he presented John J. Mearsheimer's more recent publications as problematic in that they use a Retrofuturistic interpretation of our present to legitimise a return to authoritarian structures. To illustrate these ideas, he concluded by aptly describing Retrofuturistic Realism as the "cynical zombie" of  the actual Realist IR Theory. 

As part of the Departmental Seminar, Teach@Tuebingen Fellow Barbara Gruber gave a talk on 23 November 2022 on the topic of "'Affective Discipline in Disciplining Affect - Resilience in Radicalisation Prevention", which she is also researching as part of her doctoral thesis. Using radicalisation prevention programmes in Germany and the Netherlands as examples, she showed how primary and secondary prevention work and complement each other. In doing so, she also addressed differences in the programmes of both countries, which in the Netherlands, for example, can also be compulsorily prescribed, but in Germany can only take place with the consent of the individual at risk. She also explained the importance of language which is used in the context of these preventive measures and which is mostly affective, but can also become more "disciplining" in the context of secondary prevention. You can read more about Barbara Gruber's work here.

On 02 November 2022, Cengiz Gunes gave a lecture as part of the Departmental Seminar. Titled ‘The Kurds in a Changing Middle East’, it discussed the Kurds’ rise as new regional actors and their impact on the regional order. Notwithstanding a strong sense of shared identity amongst Kurdish communities and a plethora of unifying symbols and myths that serve to strengthen these bonds, Cengiz identified the lack of large-scale political cooperation as a defining feature of Kurdish political activism across the region. Building on this observation, he dedicated the remainder of his talk to discussing the dynamics of Kurdish politics in Iraq, Turkey, Syria and Iran, respectively. Recent developments in these countries suggest that ‘the Kurdish Moment’ in the Middle East has stalled, if not already passed. Cengiz Gunes is a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Postdoctoral Fellow at our research cluster. You can read more about his work here.

On 26 October 2022, we welcomed Juha Vuori, Professor of International Politics at the University of Tampere (Finland), to Tübingen. He kicked off this semester’s Departmental Seminar with a presentation of his forthcoming monograph on ‘Chinese Macrosecuritisation’. To advance our theoretical understanding of these processes, he analysed the influence of four major macrosecuritisation discourses on domestic discussions and policies in China: The Cold War, climate change, the anti-nuclear movement and the ‘Global War on Terrorism’. In doing so, he uncovered the dynamics of dismissal, translation and transformation underlying the dissemination of these discourses in China. According to Juha Vuori, analysing these patterns reveals important insights into a hitherto sidelined aspect within the (macro)securitisation literature: Instances in which securitisations do not take place despite all likeliness. 

As part of the MAPIR Keynote 2022, Prof. Dr Susanne Buckley-Zistel gave a lecture on 'Origins and Effects of Narrating Sexual Violence - Knowledge Production in Transitional Justice Institutions' on 20 October. As part of a research project at the University of Marburg, she examined the concluding reports of several truth commissions, which have only recently put sexual violence in conflicts on their agenda. With Liberia, Sierra Leone and Kenya as case studies, she showed how sexual violence was described and justified in these contexts. Specifically, she applied the three narratives Instrumentality, Unreason, and Mythology to the commissions' final reports, which reflected them using at times very graphic examples. Using the method of narrative analysis to examine the reports, it was argued that knowledge production equals power and that the commissions used this power to construct a certain narrative about sexual violence. Lastly, Prof. Buckley-Zistel also addressed the problematic tendency of these accounts to reflect not the agenda of the victims, but that of the experts involved in the creation process of the reports.

As part of the Departmental Seminar, Dr. Sarah Clowry gave her inaugural lecture on the topic ‘Reconciling the Rift: International Mediation and Identity’ on 13 July 2022. Her talk interrogated whether, and if so how, international mediation might shape the identities of the conflict parties. Proceeding from the position that identities are socially constructed, she examined two contemporary instances of mediation: the early UN-led efforts in relation to the Syrian civil war and the initial phases of the peace process launched to solve the crisis in Yemen. She argued that mediators and conflict parties, in partnership or in opposition, can reimagine the identities of the conflict parties within, and in response to, mediation. Mediation can operate as an arena in which identities are reconstructed while the very occurrence of mediation can trigger and fuel processes of identity reconstruction. Furthermore, according to Sarah Clowry, the practice of mediation, and in particular the norms promoted through and contained within it, can serve to reconstruct identities. 

To help students come to terms with recent developments in and around Ukraine, the University of Tübingen teamed up with the Universities of Freiburg, Magdeburg, Marburg and Mainz to offer a cross-site seminar on “The Russian-Ukrainian conflict: root causes, dynamics and approaches to conflict management.” It was taught jointly by five lecturers from these universities in cooperation with selected German, international and Ukrainian experts. From our end, the seminar was led by Gabi Schlag. The aim was not just to talk “about” the war in Ukraine but also to engage with Ukrainian scholars, experts and social voices. For this purpose, Georgiy Kasianov, Lisa E. Gaufman, Maria Malksöo, Helena Legarda, Tatjana Zhurzhenko, Tetyana Malyarenko, Tetiana Kalenychenko and José Pascal da Rocha were invited to give keynote speeches and engage in discussions with the students. 

On Tuesday, July 12, 2022, we were pleased to welcome Toni Haastrup, Professor in the Department of International Politics at the University of Stirling, online as part of the seminar 'Germany and the EU in International Politics'. She is one of the leading professors in the field of Africa-EU relations and gave a lecture on 'Unpacking Contemporary Africa-EU Relations'. From a feminist and postcolonial perspective, she interpreted current Africa-EU relations as a continuation and manifestation of colonial relations characterised by exploitation and inequality. Adding the concept of ontological security, it would become even clearer that the EU uses this form of relations to secure its self-image. This is not to say that the relationship has not changed drastically in recent years. The EU increasingly sees Africa as a security partner rather than just an economic trading partner. Africa, on the other hand, no longer wants to accept this asymmetrical relationship and is turning to other partners such as China. This, in turn, would unsettle the EU in its self-image.

On 29 June 2022, Jana Hönke gave a lecture on ‘Africa’s Multiple Globalities: Chinese Companies and Practices of Securing Economic Infrastructure’ as part of the Departmental Seminar. Hönke is a Professor of Sociology of Africa at the University of Bayreuth. She currently directs the ERCINFRAGLOB project Africa’s Infrastructure Globalities and is co-editor of Security Dialogue and the Spaces of Peace, Security and Development book series. In her talk, she urged for a more pluralistic and procedural understanding of the global order and, in this context, provided a threefold criticism of the existing literature on China-Africa relations. According to Jana Hönke, the predominance of value-laden judgments concerning China’s engagement in Africa and its framing as a competitor to the US and the West significantly limits the scope of analysis by focusing primarily on (Chinese) state actors, downplaying African agency and thereby overlooking the actual dynamics on the ground. To capture the multi-layered and complex nature of Chinese engagement in Africa, she advocated for a micro-scale approach, arguing that infrastructure projects and practices in particular lend themselves to an analysis of local dynamics. Her lecture was followed by a lively discussion with the audience. 

On 28 June 2022, we had the pleasure of welcoming Bahar Rumelili, Professor at the Department of International Relations at Istanbul’s Koç University and a leading scholar of ontological security theory, to Tübingen. As part of an open lecture titled ‘Security as Identity – Recent Advances in Ontological Security Studies’, she reviewed the concept of ontological security and its application in the field of International Relations. After tracing the notion’s origins, she provided an overview of the various ways IR scholars have applied the theory to generate new insights into conflict and conflict resolution, foreign policy analysis, the study of identity and emotions, and many more. Highlighting her own research on the theoretical link between ontological (in)security and anxiety, she further explained how peoples’ or states’ attachment to certain routines and identity narratives might thwart attempts at conflict resolution since the prospect of peace may endanger their sense of continuity and thus create more anxiety than adhering to the certainties of the status quo would. Against this backdrop, Bahar Rumelili concluded that ontological insecurity might nevertheless be necessary for radical change.

For the 24th time, the University of Tübingen sent a delegation to the National Model United Nations (NMUN) Conference, which took place in New York from 3 to 8 April. This simulation of various United Nations (UN) committees provided students with an authentic insight into the workings of the UN and the world of diplomacy. In 2020, the annual conference could not take place for the first time since World War 2 due to the Covid-19 crisis. This made it all the more enjoyable to travel to New York again this year to represent Venezuela in a total of nine committees. In these committees, the students discussed numerous interrelated problems such as climate change, war, economic inequalities and the violation of human rights, of course also against the background of the Covid 19 pandemic. After months of preparation in two seminars and several rehearsal simulations (including the Tübingen Model United Nations), the conference began on April 3 with the Opening Ceremony and Agenda Setting on Day 1, after which participants formed Working Groups over the next few days to work on Working Papers, which eventually became Draft Resolutions and were adopted as Resolutions in the Voting Procedure on Day 4. This year, the participation of Tübingen was again successful, and the entire delegation was awarded the Distinguished Delegation Award for their appearance and authentic representation of Venezuela. In addition, the Tübingen delegation was able to win 2022 UNEA and UNESCO Position Paper Awards, which are given separately for each committee.

On May 18, 2022, Aidan Gnoth presented findings and conclusions from his doctoral dissertation at the Departmental Seminar. Titled "Critiquing Criticality in International Peacebuilding," he traced how the critical stream of peace research is not as critical as it postulates. In doing so, he examined how and who writes about peace research through coding numerous articles, a subsequent network analysis, and expert interviews. From this analysis, he found that criticism consisted of critiquing systems and approaches rather than drawing alternatives to those systems. In a next step, Aidan Gnoth tried to explain what caused such a development. In this context, he viewed the neoliberal functioning of academia as a major problem. According to him, it is problematic that citations and publications are seen as the value of the academic world because publishing cannot change the world - for this, one has to go out into the non-academic world. What strategies for this could look like and how they could be implemented was discussed in a subsequent Q&A session.

On May 4, 2022, the second Departmental Seminar took place in the form of a panel discussion on the topic "Russia's War in Ukraine - A Watershed for German Politics?". Experts with a wide range of backgrounds were invited to participate: From the Institute of Political Science, Hans-Jürgen Bieling, Thomas Diez, Andreas Hasenclever, Hendrik Quest and Josefine Kurt were present. Anne Kruck, consultant for peace education approaches at the Berghof Foundation, completed the panel. Under the moderation of Gabi Schlag, the discussion focused on whether and to what extent the Russian invasion of Ukraine is causing a turning point in German foreign and security policy. 
 

The Departmental Seminar is back! ‘Aggression, War, Prospects for Peace: Russia, Ukraine & European Order’ was the title of the inaugural event held on 27 April 2022. Three highly distinguished researchers joined us for this special occasion: Elizaveta Gaufman, Assistant Professor of Russian Discourse and Politics at the University of Groningen, Yuliia Kurnyshova, Researcher at the Institute of International Relations at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv and Andrey Makarychev, Professor of Regional Political Studies at the University of Tartu’s Johann Skytte Institute of Political Science. Together with moderator Thomas Diez, they discussed the origins of the war and its subsequent evolution through different theoretical and conceptual lenses. In this context, all three panelists highlighted the importance of belief systems in understanding Russia’s recent foreign policy choices: Yuliia Kurnyschova pointed to the frequent utilisation of historical analogies to justify the war. Andrey Makarychev argued that mythological beliefs prevailed over rational calculations and that Russian foreign policy, in general, is backward rather than forward-looking. Elizaveta Gaufman traced the evolution of public perceptions of the conflict through Russian social media. By drawing on ontological security theory, she offered an explanation as to why many Russians struggle to come to terms with the war. The panellists also discussed the use of heteronormative concepts of femininity and masculinity as discursive instruments to legitimise the war: Notions of Ukraine being a subordinate entity and an integral part of the Russian family that has strayed from the right path and thus requires saving by the patriarch are seen to be both a tool for political legitimisation and a genuine belief held by Russian elites. However, while this vision may be influential domestically, its realisation has now become a distant prospect. As pointed out by Yuliia Kurnyshova, the war has instead led to a major consolidation of the Ukrainian nation. 

It goes without saying that the impact of Russia’s attack on Ukraine is also deeply felt within Tübingen. To this end, Thomas Diez participated in a panel discussion titled "The End of Peace" organised by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation in cooperation with the German-American Institute in Tübingen on 14 March. Together with his co-panellist Klaus Gestwa, Professor of Eastern European History at the University of Tübingen, and the moderator Dr. Thomas Gijswijt, foreign policy expert at the American Studies Department, he reflected on the significance of the Ukraine war for the future of the global and especially the European order. The topics covered included the role of economic interdependencies and the reliance on Russian oil and gas imports, the likelihood of a NATO intervention and China’s stance on the war of aggression. In this context, the experts gave an insight into Russia’s foreign policy identity and geopolitical ambitions. Considering the demands made by some realist IR scholars in this regard for the recognition of a Russian sphere of influence, they also discussed whether a neutral status for Ukraine would be a viable or even a desirable solution. The event was recorded and is available in German on Youtube.

This year's MAPIR Keynote was held on October 28, 2021. It was given by Stefanie Kappler, Professor of Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding at Durham University. Under the title "Peace & Memory - Curating the Past for the Present", she shed light on the role of dealing with the past in societies that have lived through a severe conflict. In particular, she addressed the tense relationship between the goal of supporting societies in their reconstruction and the goal of combating the causes of conflict, which can be found in many peacebuilding approaches. She linked this to the question of which actors should and must be involved in this process of (re)construction and how experienced suffering, painful memories and residual trauma should be dealt with. Stefanie Kappler's lecture ended with a clear plea for a consistent confrontation with the past and, in the course of this, referred to three particularly important aspects: The suffering of the victims must be acknowledged, there needs to be an open approach to memories of past events that differ from one another, and peace is necessarily always linked to demands for justice. In this sense, Stefanie Kappler highlighted the important connection between the academic disciplines of Memory Studies and Peace and Conflict Studies. While the former discipline examines how the past is remembered, the latter discipline offers the complementary perspective of how this way of remembering influences contemporary conflicts.

On July 20, 2021, Ahmet Sözen, professor of political science and international relations at the Eastern Mediterranean University (EMU) and Constantinos Adamides, associate professor of international relations at the University of Nicosia, visited the seminar "Cyprus - A Conflict at a Crossroads," led by Thomas Diez. They both gave their views on the current state of affairs in the Cypriot conflict on the microlevel as well as in regard to its embeddedness in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Ahmet Sözen highlighted that the failure of the Crans-Montana talks on Cyprus (2015-2017) should not be considered a watershed as much. What can be witnessed according to his opinion is a discursive shift in Turkish foreign policy, shifting from the support of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation (BBF) to the need to find an alternative solution, which could be two equally sovereign states of Cyprus. However, Sözen questioned whether this really represents a radical change in Turkish foreign policy or rather an attempt to influence negotiations on Cyprus from a higher position.
Constantinos Adamides described the post-2017 period as a period of stagnation and emphasized that many think of the lack of retrogression as progress. This mentality, however, hinders chances of real progress and makes the status quo appear as a positive development. Adamides admitted that Turkey’s more assertive, militarized foreign policy in combination with its rhetoric push for a two-state solution could hint towards a negotiating strategy to reach a more favorable BBF but it could also be the real goal. The Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot leaders will probably meet again informally in the context of the next General Assembly in New York. Sözen pointed out that whether the parties will come to the conclusion that there is common ground to build on and restart formal negotiations will very much depend on how Turkey’s geopolitical position is going to unfold. Nevertheless, both Sözen and Adamides agreed that no major change in the Cyprus conflict is expected any time soon.

Last weekend, from 18-20.6.2021, political science students conducted a mediation simulation. The subject was the conflict in Eastern Ukraine. For three days, discussions were held, speeches were made, consensus was found, and red lines were insisted upon. As in real life, positions hardened, and delegates became emotional at times. But in the end an agreement was signed. 
After heated discussions, the students came to an agreement on Sunday. It includes a ceasefire in Eastern Ukraine, an improvement of crossings into the occupied territories of Luhansk and Donetsk, and they agreed to meet again for negotiations within the next 30 days. 
The simulation is held every two years at the Institute of Political Science as part of the seminar "Theories and Practices of Mediation". In the seminar, students learn about theoretical foundations, which they then can apply in the simulation - in practice.
Lecturer Gabi Schlag created a framework program and led the media team, but the structuring of the negotiation process was in the hands of the students. Four of the participants formed the fictitious UN mediation team and were responsible for the structure and moderation of the negotiations. 
The other participants also took on fictitious roles - including those of Ukrainian President Zelensky and Russian Prime Minister Mishustin. Merkel, Macron, OSCE representatives and Eastern Ukrainian separatist leaders were also at the negotiation table with their roles brought to life by the students. 
Simulations enable students to put themselves in other positions, to reflect on the interests, needs and fears of conflict parties and to understand a conflict in its various facets. The fact that violent conflicts are not easily resolved and that negotiations develop dynamics of their own is one of the most important insights to take away from the simulation.
For the students, it was the first time in over a year that a course could take place offline – at the university. In compliance with hygiene measures, with negative Covid test results and in hybrid form the students were finally able to discuss face-to-face again, to exchange ideas and to learn together.

On June 10th 2021 Dr. E. (Lisa) Gaufman, who is Assistant Professor of Russian Discourse and Politics at the University of Groningen and University of Tübingen alumna, held a talk on Ukraine in Russian popular imagination. This online talk was part of a seminar on Theories and Practices of Mediation where students are focusing on the conflict in Eastern Ukraine, but it was open to all students from the institute.  
Gaufman presented different strands of how Ukraine is presented in Russia – as brother, sister, and enemy. Firstly, Gaufman talked about the perception of Ukraine being Russia’s little brother – a non-state with no language or history on its own. Secondly, she talked about the gendered perception of Ukraine. This can i.a. be seen on social media, where there have been many comments since 2014 following a narrative of Ukraine being a loose woman, who sells herself to NATO and the EU. Thirdly, there has been a rise on fascism discourse regarding Ukraine in Russian media since 2014. Reporting focuses on far-right extremists in the Ukraine, drawing a connection to historic anti-Nazi discourse in Russia and thereby perpetuating an understanding of Ukraine as the enemy. 
 
 

On February 25, 2021, Ian Manners gave a lecture on his “Normative Power Europe”-concept (NPE) in the seminar "A Normative Power No More? The EU in International Politics" by Thomas Diez. He is currently working at the Department of Political Science at Lund University and has been previously employed as Professor at University of Copenhagen as well as Roskilde University. Ian Manners works at the nexus of critical social theory and the study of the European Union in planetary politics. His seminal piece "Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?" which served as a foundation for the seminar has widely influenced academic debates in European Studies and beyond.
In his guest lecture, Manners gave an overview of his research background and engagement with NPE and provided an insight into his current research focus. In engagement with the class he also addressed the EU’s LGBTQI+ policies, his understanding of power as well as tensions within and the possible future of his concept.

On February 18, 2021, Prof. PhD Thomas Christiansen gave a lecture on EU-China relations in the seminar "A Normative Power No More? The EU in International Politics" by Prof. Dr. Thomas Diez. Christiansen is a Professor at Luiss Università Guido Carli in Rome. He has published on different aspects of European Union politics as well as EU-China relations.
In his talk, Christiansen provided insights in the history and current state of EU-China trading relations and their growing ties in the international realm. He highlighted parallels and differences between both global players and further touched upon the complex triangular relationship between the US, the EU and China. Engaging with the questions asked by students, he also referred to the potential fragmentation of European unity in the face of selective Chinese foreign interest. However, he emphasized the importance for China to access the EU’s single market and argued that China has no revisionist aims but is seeking for acceptance as a global power in the international system. Finally, he challenged the fixed idea of a singular “Western identity” in opposition to China.

On February 4, 2021, Prof. PhD Senem Aydin-Düzgit gave a lecture on EU-Turkey relations in the seminar "A Normative Power No More? The EU in International Politics" by Prof. Dr. Thomas Diez. Aydin-Düzgit is currently a professor of International  Relations at Sabancı University and Senior Scholar and Coordinator of Research and Academic Affairs at the Istanbul Policy Center. In her contribution, she drew a comprehensive picture of the development, the current state as well as the future of EU-Turkey relations and Turkey's accession process to the EU. She argued inter alia that the transactional, interest-driven relationship that currently exists between the EU and Turkey does not offer a long-term perspective. Aydin-Düzgit also pointed out the complexity of the issue, which stems from the escalating situation in the Eastern Mediterranean, the Cyprus conflict, and the now changing position in the White House in parts.

On 28 January 2021, Dr. Kataryna Wolczuk (University of Birmingham) gave a lecture on EU-Russia relations in the seminar "A Normative Power No More? The EU in International Politics" by Prof. Dr. Thomas Diez. In particular, she addressed the role of Ukraine and argued for a more empirically grounded, as opposed to a detached theoretical, approach to the EU's relations with its Eastern neighborhood.

On 07 January 2021, Dr. Franz von Lucke gave a lecture in the seminar "A Normative Power No More? The EU in International Politics" organized by Prof. Dr. Thomas Diez, about the EU's conceptions of justice in international climate negotiations. Von Lucke explained the changes in the EU's conceptions of global justice in relation to the climate crisis and, accordingly, in its negotiation strategies, played an important role in the conclusion of the Paris Climate Agreement. In conclusion, von Lucke addressed questions from students on the prospects for success of the international climate regime. Read von Luckes corresponding paper, as well as more about the Globus research project.

On 17 December 2020, Prof. Dr. Nathalie Tocci, visiting professor at the University of Tübingen, gave a lecture on the EU Global Strategy as part of a seminar held by Prof. Dr. Thomas. In her lecture, Tocci discussed the process of developing the Global Strategy, in which she played a key role, as well as its implications for the role of the EU as a normative power. She concluded by discussing with the students the future of the Global Strategy and the opportunities and obstacles on the way to a more coherent EU foreign policy.

On 27 November 2020, Oliver Richmond, distinguished visiting professor at the University of Tuebingen, gave a MAPIR online lecture on the "Evolution of the International Peace Architecture”, which according to Richmond, can be traced through six stages or layers.
Oliver Richmond argued that the debates following the so-called local turn illustrate how a much grander edifice has emerged, from local to global scales, which though fragile and unstable, offers some prospects for further development. The theories and doctrines related to peace-keeping, mediation, peacebuilding, and state-building raise a range of long-standing questions about the evolution and integrity of this architecture. Finally, in the lecture he outlined the implications of the architecture's evolution, highlighting a form of peace-related to global justice and sustainability which remains in tension with more pervasive forms of governmentality.

On 22 July 2020, Prof. Dr. Pinar Bilgin (Bilkent University Ankara) participated in a discussion on "Prospects for Non-Western International Relations". The event was organized by Prof. Dr. Thomas Diez at the end of his seminar on this topic. Prof. Bilgin first presented a lecture in which she gave an insight into her academic biography and her engagement with non-Western approaches to International Relations. Prof. Bilgin then discussed with students the question of what is meant by non-Western approaches in the first place, as well as the epistemological, methodological, and normative opportunities and difficulties of including such perspectives more strongly in International Relations.

On 25 June 2020, an online expert discussion on "Looking at Mali: European and global efforts, losses - and gains?" took place within the framework of the seminar "Security Institutions in Europe" organized by Dr. Gabi Schlag. MAPIR students had organized the discussion as a substitute for an excursion to Strasbourg, Brussels and Geneva, which had been cancelled due to corona. Michael Gahler (CDU), Member of the European Parliament and foreign policy spokesperson of the EPP Group, and Lieutenant Colonel Björn Hoyme, a consultant in the Federal Ministry of Defence, were invited as guests. In the course of the discussion, the students had the opportunity to discuss the challenges and prospects of success of the Bundeswehr missions in Mali with the two experts. In addition to the question of the possibilities of intensified European cooperation, critical aspects of Germany's engagement in the Sahel region were also examined.

From 17-21 February 2020 an excursion to Cyprus organised by Prof. Thomas Diez took place. The students had previously dealt intensively with the Cyprus conflict in a seminar. The excursion now offered the opportunity to deepen this knowledge and to form their own picture of the conflict. The students had the opportunity to discuss the developments of the Cyprus conflict and possible future scenarios in various meetings. On the agenda were discussions with activists, academics and NGOs, including the Peace Research Institute Oslo, the Goethe Institute and the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. Of particular interest was the meeting with the Foreign Minister of the Turkish Cypriots, Kudret Özersay.

From 11-14 February 2020, the Tübingen delegation to the National Model United Nations Conference in New York headed by Lea Augenstein undertook an excursion to Geneva. In discussions with staff from various UN bodies, the delegates were able to gain insights into the functioning of the UN system and benefit from detailed expert knowledge in preparation for the substantive work in their respective committees. The group visited the World Trade Organization, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the UN Refugee Agency, and the World Health Organization, among others.

On 28 January 2020, a student day on climate justice was organised by Prof. Thomas Diez and Dr. Franz von Lucke as part of the GLOBUS research project. The keynote was held by Prof. Chukwumerije Okereke, member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Okereke examined the challenges of climate change from a justice perspective with a special focus on the Global South and discussed approaches to a more just climate policy. Following Okerkeke's lecture, students presented posters they had created during a seminar on various aspects of climate justice. The three best posters were awarded a prize and the students will present them at a GLOBUS event in Bologna in May 2020. Finally, an expert discussion on climate justice took place under the heading "Think Global, Act Local". Representatives from Fridays for Future, MyClimate Germany, the University of Tübingen, Stuttgart Airport and Tübingen's Mayor Boris Palmer took part in the discussion.

On 21 January 2020, Dr. Hylke Dijkstra (Maastricht University) gave a lecture on "Life and Death of International Institutions", in which he presented the preliminary results of his European Research Council funded project on this topic. Based on quantitative analyses, Dijkstra argued that international organisations that have a large bureaucratic apparatus rarely die or get replaced by others. This, according to Dijkstra, should be a cause for hope in view of the much-cited end of the liberal world order. Following his presentation, Dijkstra discussed the methodology of his research project and possibilities for further research with Prof Thomas Diez and students.

On 16 January 2020, Dr. Umut Bozkurt (Eastern Mediterranean University) and Dr. Maria Hadjipavlou (University of Cyprus) participated in a panel discussion on the future of the Cyprus conflict. As members of the Gender Advisory Team Cyprus and the Technical Committee on Gender Equality, Bozkurt and Hadjipavlou particularly addressed the chances of a stronger gender focus in the peace negotiations. Together with Prof Thomas Diez and students, they also discussed ways to strengthen the role of civil society in the peace process and the extension of the UN peace mission on the island.

On 25 November 2019, Prof. Thomas Diez took part in a panel discussion during the climate strike week at the University of Tübingen. Together with Prof. Kramer (general rhetoric), Prof. Trautwein (educational sciences) and Prof. Wiesing (medical ethics), he discussed the responsibility of science in the climate debate, the opportunities and challenges of climate change for democratic societies, and the effects of the climate crisis on international relations. There was consensus across the panel that climate change must play a greater role in science and university teaching.

From 8-10 July 2019 a mediation-simulation took place in Bad Urach under the direction of Dr. Gabi Schlag. In order to save the Iran nuclear agreement, 15 participants took over the roles of, among others, Frederica Mogherini, High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Mike R. Pompeo, US Secretary of State, and Mohammad Javad Zarif, Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran. They were supported by three mediators. At the end of the eventful negotiations, all parties agreed on a common additional declaration: Joint Agreement of Action!

On 3 July 2019, Prof. Thomas Diez gave a lecture on "Power and Inclusion in the International Society" at the Departmental Seminar. In his lecture, he presented some basic conceptual thoughts on these concepts and their relation, and applied them to the example of the EU as a normative power.

On 2 July 2019, Lee Jarvis, Professor of International Politics at the University of East Anglia, gave a guest lecture as part of the lecture "Discourses of Security". In his presentation, Jarvis dealt with parliamentary debates on the proscription of terrorist organisations in the United Kingdom. He analysed how in these debates the liberal British identity is produced and reproduced by juxtaposing it with the illiberal and irrational identity of terrorist organisations. The regularity of this process lends a ritualistic character to the always successful proscription procedures. Jarvis then discussed with the students limits and further possible applications of his concept.

On 2 July 2019, Prof. Münevver Cebeci of the Marmara University Istanbul, gave a guest lecture entitled "Deconstructing Ideal Power Europe: The EU and the Arab Change". Cebeci analyzed how the EU constructs its self-understanding as a normative power and how this construction is reproduced in scientific literature, using the example of European reactions to the changes in the Arab world in 2010 and 2011. Cebeci stressed that she did not intend her work to evaluate EU policy from a normative perspective. However, her poststructuralist research offered a critical reading that made it possible to deconstruct the processes of identity construction in the political and academic discourse on EU foreign policy.

On 25 June 2019, Niklas Schörnig, Deputy Chairman of the Research Council of the Peace Research Institute Frankfurt, gave a presentation as part of the lecture "Discourses of Security". Schörnig defended a neorealist "narrow" concept of security. Referring to recent world political events and developments in the arms industry, he argued that the probability of interstate wars was increasing. According to Schörnig, preventing these wars was the central challenge, which is why widening the concept of security was problematic. Schörnig then engaged in an intensive exchange with the students, who critically discussed his arguments.

On 18 June 2019, Cynthia Petrigh, founder and director of "Beyond Peace", gave a presentation as part of the lecture "Discourses of Security". Through her company, Petrigh provides training and advisory services to armed forces, peacekeepers, and non-state armed groups on international humanitarian law, compliance with international norms, prevention of sexual violence, and investigation of human rights violations. She assists societies in transformation processes by supporting mediation efforts, dialogue initiatives, and promoting the participation of women in peace processes.
Petrigh provided detailed information on her work in various conflict areas, including Cameroon, Mali, the Philippines and the Central African Republic. She spoke in detail about the opportunities and challenges of integrating gender perspectives and awareness for human rights and humanitarian law into armed conflicts. In this regard Petrigh offered surprising insights into the practical cooperation with non-state armed groups.

On 17 June 2019, Prof. Thomas Diez gave as part of the Studium Generale lecture "The Return of the Sultan? On the Political Economy of Authoritarianism in Turkey", a presentation on the topic of "The European Union and Turkey". He analysed the development of relations between the EU and Turkey from the 1960s to the present. Diez described the current deadlock in the accession talks as the result of a dilemma: both sides were neither interested in serious negotiations nor in breaking off the talks, an imminent solution to this problem was not to be expected. Against this background, Diez pointed out the importance of civil society exchanges for a potential mutual rapprochement.

On 21 May 2019, Ben Tonra from University College Dublin gave a lecture on "Brexit and European Security" as part of the lecture "Germany and the EU in International Politics". Tonra dealt with the implications of Brexit for the European security architecture and the Common Security and Defence Policy of the EU. Tonra also gave a particularly vivid analysis of the consequences of the Brexit for the security of Ireland, warning against a renewed escalation of ethnic and religious conflicts on the island.

On 15 May 2019, Dr. Gabi Schlag gave a lecture at the IfP's Departmental Seminar entitled "Ignore or Delete? Governing graphic visual content on social media". She dealt with the EU's approach to the regulation of graphic-visual content uploaded, distributed and viewed on social media platforms. Gabi Schlag thus tried to answer the question of who has the authority and legitimacy to govern the Internet and what a legitimate regulation of graphic content should look like.

Also this year, a delegation from Tübingen took part in the National Model United Nations Conference, in New York, the largest worldwide. From 14-19 April 2019, the interdisciplinary group represented the Republic of Namibia. In addition to the intensive work in the committees, a visit to the Namibian UN representation was also on the agenda. The delegation was awarded numerous "Position Paper Awards" for its substantive preparation for the work in the individual committees. On the last day, some members of the delegation had the opportunity to address their committees in the plenary hall of the UN General Assembly. At the closing ceremony, the delegation from Tübingen was also honoured as a "Distinguished Delegation".

On 22 January 2019 Thomas Diez gave, as part of the Studium Generale lecture “Autonomy-Demands and Secession-Movements in Europe and the World”, a presentation on the case of Cyprus. He described the causes of the conflict and traced its course along various failed rapprochements of the conflict-parties. Finally, Thomas Diez sketched a possible concept to solve the conflict, which then was object of intense discussions.