IntroducciónLa globalización se ha convertido en una de las palabras de moda del nuevo milenio tanto en el discurso académico como en el popular. Aunque las alusiones públicas a la globalización se han hecho más comunes a lo largo de las últimas dos décadas, hay vastos debates que siguen sin resolverse sobre su genealogía, trayectoria y aspectos distintivos. Lo que se ha hecho evidente es que nuestro propio tiempo de globalización política, económica y cultural desafía la separación estricta entre asuntos internos y exteriores, domésticos e internacionales, locales y globales. 1 De aquí que la globalización ha puesto en duda las premisas ortodoxas y las concepciones de la teoría y de las prácticas de las relaciones internacionales, al menos en su variante de enfoque territorial convencional. Algunos inclusive cuestionan la identidad misma de las relaciones internacionales como un campo de investigación académica, 2 argumentando que la globalización genera nuevos

The use of the concept of “global civil society” (GCS) acknowledges the intensifying role of non-state civic actors in world politics and expresses the emergence of a unique social sphere transcending national boundaries. Extensive literatures strive to suggest conceptualizations and assessments of the actual and desired effects of GCS. Nevertheless, relatively little attention has been given to the interplay between the emerging sphere of a GCS and the traditional sphere of international or interstate interactions. This article examines the idea of GCS through an exploration of the conceptual interplay between the notions of GCS and the interstate system. It presents a typology of three possible ideal-type relations: (1) GCS as replacement of statist features of the international system; (2) GCS as opposition to the state system; and (3) GCS as subsidiary organ to the international society. From a perspective informed by the English School of international relations theory, the article argues that the enhanced role of GCS in world politics is a result of international society’s attempts to adapt interstate rules and practices to the context of globalization.

In recent years, political scientists increasingly have used data-science tools to research political processes, positions, and behaviors. Because both domestic and international politics are grounded in oral and written texts, computerized text analysis (CTA)—typically based on natural-language processing—has become one of the most notable applications of data-science tools in political research. This article explores the promises and perils of using CTA methods in political research and, specifically, the study of international relations. We highlight fundamental analytical and methodological gaps that hinder application and review processes. Whereas we acknowledge the significant contribution of CTA to political research, we identify a dual “engagement deficit” that may distance those without prior background in data science: (1) the tendency to prioritize methodological innovation over analytical and theoretical insights; and (2) the scholarly and political costs of requiring high proficiency levels and training to comprehend, assess, and use advanced research models.

No abstract

This article explores the nature of the contemporary “special relationship” between Germany and Israel. Having emerged out of the ashes of the Second World War and the Holocaust, political relations between these two states are widely seen as having successfully undergone a process of reconciliation. A key feature is German support for Israel, usually understood as a constant attempt to pay off a historical debt in exchange for rehabilitation and recognition of Germany as a “good state.” The article probes another interpretation by asking whether contemporary German–Israeli relations have reached the stage of friendship, a relationship structured by care rather than guilt. To this end, it presents an original conceptual framework of interstate friendship as a bond of shared memories and visions that enable a common orientation toward the past and the future both sides are committed to invest in. Applied to an interpretive analysis of the “sharedness” of the memory of the Holocaust and the vision of a secure Israel, the paper finds strong evidence for the former yet significant gaps in the latter, concluding that relations between the states of Germany and Israel still fall short of friendship.