This article compares two central pillars of China’s space programme and observes that Chinese space diplomacy is not uniform regarding international scientific co-operation either in its approaches or in results. In the case of the Chinese Space Station programme, the China National Space Administration went through existing United Nations (UN) channels and successfully attracted international partners. However, the International Lunar Research Station has avoided UN channels and used national and bilateral platforms. This bifurcation in approaches and results offers an intriguing puzzle concerning international co-operation: practices of institutionalised multilateral co-operation and areas of state-centric bilateral co-operation co-exist in this case and further complicate the issue of space diplomacy. To propose a potential explanation, it is argued here that a crucial intermediate variable — institutional density — requires further theorising, as it seems to influence strategic choices about space diplomacy, which may lead to success or failure.
International military alliances have developed to deter potential foes from initiating war and, when deterrence fails, to defeat enemies. From the earliest days of spaceflight, US military leaders have partnered with other nations for various purposes. With the space domain becoming more congested and contested in the early 21st century¸ the US defence establishment has begun expanding and strengthening space-related relationships with like-minded international partners to deter irresponsible, adversarial space behaviour and perpetuate peaceful uses of the outer space domain for civil and commercial purposes.
A quantum leap is under way in space as a domain of human activity. The global space economy has rapidly reached almost USD450 billion in size and is projected to grow to over USD1 trillion by the 2040s. There are hundreds of actors involved, from space agencies to private companies to start-ups. Over 70 countries have space programmes and 14 have launch capabilities. These developments have involved intense transnational and international co-operation and competition, across both the public and private sectors. With such rapid changes underway, this article takes stock of how these developments impact international relations. Overall, this is the first special issue in the field of international relations to use theories of diplomacy to bring to light the various ways in which experts, scientists, astronauts, space enthusiasts and professional diplomats, among others, have shaped the formal and informal interactions among states in this key area of foreign policy.
In the United States, the criminal justice system comprises a multitude of complex social structures and policies that directly impact the lives of every citizen. The prison policy initiative reports nearly one out of every 100 citizens in the United States is incarcerated in a prison or jail. Scholars also note that the control mechanisms and sanctions associated with incarceration extend to an incarcerated individuals’ family members and social network. As studies demonstrate how underfunded schools and communities, punitive school disciplinary practices, violent social policies, and failed safety measures contribute to arrest and incarceration, the lived experiences of those who have navigated these challenges should be explored. In this article, I describe how I established a “resistance pedagogical framework” in my undergraduate and graduate courses. Rather than relying solely on traditional textbooks, I created panel engagement opportunities, field trips, and other activities that allow marginalized and system-impacted individuals to challenge existing narratives of inferiority that are perpetuated by white supremacy. This article provides an overview of the shortcomings that are associated with traditional pedagogy, examples of resistance pedagogy in undergraduate and graduate classrooms, students’ perceptions of the panel engagement activities, and future implications.