Between 11/9 and 9/11: Debates and Perspectives about Changes in International Relations

September 11 (2001) events prompted a series of debates concerning how & how much has the international order changed. There is still much misunderstanding between those who assert that "nothing has changed" & those for whom "nothing will be the same after 9/11." Due to records scattering, events or processes have been studied as if they were structural changes, but without explaining how can they transform international politics. Also, the search for more useful analyses to identify both changes & continuities has produced methodological confusion. This work pursues three main objectives: first, to present a methodology of change analysis by organizing the various approach modalities with which international relations theory has been working so far. Second, to use this methodology for understanding the likely transformations of the international order as of September 11, 2001. Third, to offer some conclusions & work hypotheses on international politics change study. The author reaches four conclusions: (a) every international relation theory demands an explanation of 9/11 events & they all have arguments for such a demand; (b) in relation with this, 9/11 does not compel thinking new categories to understand its causes & outcomes; (c) from a wider perspective, & beyond any strident statement, 9/11 has not generated a major change in international politics in historical & systemic terms; & (d) a better understanding of change in international relations requires a historical approach, that has been largely eluded by this discipline. 68 References. Adapted from the source document.