“By Consent and Management”: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815

Konstantinos Travlos

“By Consent and Management”: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815

Abstract

Following the logic of discovery, I conduct a comparative descriptive analysis of the decision makers who negotiated the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713 and the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna of 1815. The goal is to establish the facts of the two cases concerning indicators of war-weariness and fear of the radical potential of war as motivations for engaging in the negotiations, and of innovative thinking about international relations as reaction to those motivations. These facts are associated with the presence of the practice of managerial coordination among the major powers after Vienna, and its absence after Utrecht. The comparative descriptive analysis leads to four theoretical propositions that can be used to build hypotheses, for future evaluation according to the logic of confirmation.

Keywords

References

Elkins, Z. & Simmons, B. (2005). On Waves, Clusters, and Diffusion: A Conceptual Framework. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1), 33–51.
Geller, D.S. & Travlos, K. (2019). Integrating Realist and Neoliberal Theories of War. Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, 25(2), 1-29.
Goddard, S.E. (2009). Brokering change: networks and entrepreneurs in international politics. International Theory, 1(2), 249-281.
Guilhot, N. (2015). Portrait of the realist as a historian: On anti-whiggism in the history of international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 21(1), 3-26.
Jervis, R. (1992). A Political Science Perspective on the Balance of Power and the Concert. American Historical Review, 97(3), 716– 24.
Kacowicz, A.M. (1995) Explaining Zones of Peace: Democracies as Satisfied Powers? Journal of Peace Research, 32(3), 265–276.
Kagan, K. (1997/8). The Myth of the European Concert: The Realist-Institutionalist Debate and Great Power Behavior in the Eastern Question,1821– 41. Security Studies,7 (2), 1– 57.
Keck, M. & Sikkink, K. (2014). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Cornell University Press.

Kraehe, E.E. (2002). Section III: Introduction. In P. Kruger & P. Schroeder (Eds)The Transformation of European Politics, 1763– 1848: Episode or Model in Modern History?, Palgrave, p. 161– 64.
Lascurettes, K.M. (2020). Orders of Exclusion: Great Powers and the Strategic Sources of Foundational Rules In International Relations. Oxford University Press.
Levy, J.S. (1983). War in the Modern Great Power System: 1495--1975. University Press of Kentucky.
Levy, J.S. (1982). The Contagion of Great Power War Behavior, 1495-1975. American Journal of Political Science, 26(3), 562-584.
Levy, J.S. & Morgan, T.C. (1986). The war-weariness hypothesis: An empirical test. American Journal of Political Science, 30(1), 26-49.
Miller, B. (1995). When Opponents Cooperate: Great Power Conflict and Collaboration in World Politics. University of Michigan Press.
Mitzen, J. (2013). Power in concert: The nineteenth-century origins of global governance. University of Chicago Press. Most, B.A. & Starr, H. (1990). Theoretical and Logical Issues in the Study of International Diffusion. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2(4), 391–412.
Randle, R.F. (1987). Issues in the history of international relations: the role of issues in the evolution of the state system. Praeger.
Richardson, L.F. (1960). Arms and Insecurity. Quadrangle.
Rosenau, J.N. & Holsti, O.R. (1984). American Leadership in World Affairs: Vietnam and the Breakdown of Consensus. Unwin Hyman.
Schroeder, P.W. (1994). The transformation of European politics, 1763-1848. Oxford University Press.
Sikkink, K. & Lutz, E. (2001). The justice cascade: the evolution and impact of foreign human rights trials in Latin America. Chicago Journal of International Law, 2(1), 1-33.
Schmidt-Voges, I. & Solana A.C. (Eds.). (2017) New Worlds? Transformation in the Culture of International Relations around the Treaty of Utrecht. Routledge.
Sofka, J.R. (1998). Metternich's Theory of European Order: A Political Agenda for “Perpetual Peace”. The Review of Politics, 60(01), 115-150.
Steiner, B.H. (2004). Collective Preventive Diplomacy: A Study in International Conflict Management. SUNY Press. Travlos, K. (2016). From Universalism to Managerial Coordination: Major Power Regulation of the Use of Force. Asian International Studies Review,17(02), 27-53
Travlos, K. (2014) From warmongers to peacebuilders: major power managerial coordination and the transformation of international relations, 1715-2001 (Doctoral dissertation) Department of Political Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2142/46760
Toynbee, J.A. (1954) A study of History. Vol. 9. Oxford University Press.
Valeriano, B. & Vasquez, J.A. (2010). Identifying and classifying complex interstate wars. International Studies Quarterly, 54(2), 561-582.
Vasquez, J.A. (2019) Contagion and War. Cambridge University Press.
Vasquez, J.A. (1999[1983]). The Power of Power Politics: From Classical Realism to Neotraditionalism. Cambridge University Press.
Wallensteen, P. (1984). Universalism vs. particularism: on the limits of major power order. Journal of Peace Research, 21(3), 243-257.
Utrecht Case Study References Black, J. (2003). Eighteenth-Century English Politics: Recent Work. Albion: A Quarterly Journal Concerned with British Studies, 35(1), 25-52
Black, J. (1987). The Collapse of the Anglo-French Alliance, 1727-1731. Sutton Publishing.
Chance, J. F. (1907). The Northern Treaties of 1719–20. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 1, 99-137.
Chance, J.F. (1902). The Baltic Expedition and Northern Treaties of 1715. The English Historical Review, 17(67), 443- 465.
Davies G, Tinling, M. & Brydges, J. (1936). Letters from James Brydges, Created Duke of Chandos, to Henry St. John, Created Viscount Bolingbroke. The Huntington Library Bulletin, 9, 119-166.
Dickinson, T.H. (1968). Henry St. John: a Reappraisal of the Young Bolingbroke. The Journal of British Studies, 7(02), 33-55.
Gibbs, G.C. (1962). Parliament and foreign policy in the age of Stanhope and Walpole. The English Historical Review, 77(302), 18-37.
Gregg, E.I. (1972). Marlborough in Exile, 1712–1714. The Historical Journal, 15(04), 593-618.
Hill, B.W. (1973). Oxford, Bolingbroke, and the Peace of Utrecht. The Historical Journal, 16(02), 241-263.
Lodge, R. (1923). Review: Le Cardinal Melchior De Polignac (1661-1741) By Pierre Paul. The English Historical Review, 38(150), 283-288.
Maurseth, P. (1964). Balance-of-Power Thinking from the Renaissance to the French Revolution. Journal of Peace Research, 1(2), 120-136.
McKay, D. (1971). Bolingbroke, Oxford and the defense of the Utrecht settlement in southern Europe. The English Historical Review, 86(339), 264-284.
Meerts, P. & Beeuwkes, P. (2008). The Utrecht Negotiations in Perspective: The Hope of Happiness for the World. International Negotiation, 13(2), 157-177.
Pitt, H.G. (1970). The Pacification of Utrecht. In J.S. Bromley (Ed.) The New Cambridge Modern History Volume 6: The Rise of Great Britain and Russia, 1688-1715/25, Oxford University Press, p.446-479.
Somerville, H.D. (1932). Shrewsbury and the Peace of Utrecht. English Historical Review, 47, 646-647.
Trevelyan, G.M. (1934) England under Queen Anne Volume III: The peace and the Protestant Succession. Longmans, Green and Company.
Turner, E.R. (1919). Parliament and Foreign Affairs, 1603-1760. The English Historical Review, 34(134), 172-197.
Williams, B. (1900). The foreign policy of England under Walpole. The English Historical Review, 15(58), 251-276.
Vienna Cast Study References Jarrett, M. (2013). The Congress of Vienna and its legacy: War and great power diplomacy after Napoleon. IB Tauris. Kissinger, H.A. (1956). The Congress of Vienna: A Reappraisal. World politics, 8(02), 264-280.
Kissinger, Η.A. (1973). A World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh and the Problems of Peace 1812-1822. Hougton Mifflin Company Sentry Edition.
King, D. (2009). Vienna, 1814: How the conquerors of Napoleon made love, war, and peace at the congress of Vienna. Broadway Books.
McGuigan, D.G. (1975). Metternich and the Duchess. Doubleday.
Nicholson, H. (1946). The Congress of Vienna: A Study in Allied Unity. Grove Press.
Zamoyski, A. (2007). Rites of peace: the fall of Napoleon and the Congress of Vienna. Harper Perennial Paperback.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

International Relations

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Konstantinos Travlos ^* This is me
0000-0003-1383-4197
Türkiye

Publication Date

June 30, 2020

Submission Date

January 12, 2020

Acceptance Date

April 20, 2020

Published in Issue

Year 2020 Volume: 2 Number: 1

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA66EK88WL

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Travlos, K. (2020). “By Consent and Management”: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815. Diplomasi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 56-74. https://izlik.org/JA66EK88WL

AMA

1.Travlos K. “By Consent and Management”: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815. JDR. 2020;2(1):56-74. https://izlik.org/JA66EK88WL

Chicago

Travlos, Konstantinos. 2020. “‘By Consent and Management’: Aversion to War, Innovative Thinking and Managerial Coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815”. Diplomasi Araştırmaları Dergisi 2 (1): 56-74. https://izlik.org/JA66EK88WL.

EndNote

Travlos K (June 1, 2020) “By Consent and Management”: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815. Diplomasi Araştırmaları Dergisi 2 1 56–74.

IEEE

[1]K. Travlos, “‘By Consent and Management’: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815”, JDR, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 56–74, June 2020, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA66EK88WL

ISNAD

Travlos, Konstantinos. “‘By Consent and Management’: Aversion to War, Innovative Thinking and Managerial Coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815”. Diplomasi Araştırmaları Dergisi 2/1 (June 1, 2020): 56-74. https://izlik.org/JA66EK88WL.

JAMA

1.Travlos K. “By Consent and Management”: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815. JDR. 2020;2:56–74.

MLA

Travlos, Konstantinos. “‘By Consent and Management’: Aversion to War, Innovative Thinking and Managerial Coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815”. Diplomasi Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol. 2, no. 1, June 2020, pp. 56-74, https://izlik.org/JA66EK88WL.

Vancouver

1.Konstantinos Travlos. “By Consent and Management”: Aversion to war, innovative thinking and managerial coordination at Utrecht 1713 and Vienna 1815. JDR [Internet]. 2020 Jun. 1;2(1):56-74. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA66EK88WL