Abstract
In his two articles ‘On the Greats and Peace’ Oliver P. Richmond outlines the long development of political theories that underpin what he calls the International Peace Architecture, or IPA. The ideas presented, he argues, have given rise to and are embodied in the institutions and practices of international security and peace. However, these ideas, institutions, and practices are, he notes, ill-suited to respond to many of the contemporary challenges to peace in the 21st Century. Together the two articles present an interesting argument, but they also suffer from a few key problems. These are primarily issues, first, of selection and exclusion (as the articles present almost wholly the ideas of white European men), and second, of inconsistency both in the ideas about how the IPA was constructed, and in ideas of how it is used. This short response outlines and explains these problems and suggests that Peace and Conflict studies, as an interdisciplinary field, is more suited to this task than IR theory alone.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 547-553 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Civil Wars |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue number | 2-3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 15 Dec 2023 |
Bibliographical note
Open Access via the T&F Agreement
Access to Document
- Miller_CW_Reponding_To_The_VOR
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.