OBSERVARE

Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between

Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025

149

SOFT ANARCHY: BALANCING SOVEREIGNTY, REGIONALISM, AND

GLOBALIZATION

MEHMET RECAI UYGUR

mehmetrecai.uygur@smk.lt

Senior Researcher, SMK College of Applied Sciences, Vilnius (Lithuania). Orcid: 0000-

0003-1872-0885

YUSUF ZAKIR BASKIN

yusuf.zakir.baskin@gmail.com

Lecturer, Gendarmerie and Coast Guard Academy, Ankara, (Türkiye). Orcid:

0000-0002-4085-4022

FATIH TEKIN

fatihtekin@inonu.edu.tr

Research Assistant, Inonu University, Malatya (Türkiye). Orcid:0000-0003-2227-0784

Abstract

In the international relations discipline, arguably the most consequential divide in the system

is between anarchy and hierarchy. Although the international system is formally anarchic,

beneath its surface lies a persistent hierarchy. As Hedley Bull suggests, anarchy does not

produce chaos but an international society governed by norms, albeit one that often masks

the dominance of great powers. Thucydides’ Melian Dialogue captures this imbalance most

starkly. The example closest to our time is the United Nations Security Council, which

epitomises how, with the rhetoric of sovereignty, structural inequity is hidden. In contrast,

soft anarchy provides the opposite explanation: a system that permits cooperation without

the need to nullify the anarchic nature of global politics. Kenneth Waltz's structural realism

argues that states, in isolation, act to survive in a self-help ecosystem. Soft anarchy alters

this assumption; it emphasises that within regional platforms, power is allowed to be pooled.

Rather than being subordinated to a global hierarchy, states are able to act through regional

organisations. In this scenario, states are able to preserve sovereignty while enhanced

cooperation is achieved by many. The claim made by Alexander Wendt, ‘anarchy is what

states make of it’, supports this model, claiming that if the structure is socially constructed,

then it can be softened with regional agency. Thus, soft anarchy embodies Rousseau's notion

of collective will and Bull's ‘anarchical society’ rephrased to the regional level. Here, power

shifts from a zero-sum tool to a shared instrument of governance. The soft anarchy is not a

utopia; instead, utopia is to manage global volatility. It provides a concept where the world is

not still divided into 193 actors; rather, it is grouped into cooperative blocs with the capability

of restoring order. It is a form of invitation to perceive order in anarchy and cooperation within

sovereignty.

Keywords

Soft Anarchy, Regional Organisations, International Order, Anarchy and Hierarchy, Power and

Cooperation.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

150

Resumo

Na disciplina das relações internacionais, pode argumentar-se que a divisão mais consequente

no sistema é entre anarquia e hierarquia. Embora o sistema internacional seja formalmente

anárquico, por baixo da sua superfície existe uma hierarquia persistente. Como sugere Hedley

Bull, a anarquia não produz caos, mas sim uma sociedade internacional governada por

normas, embora muitas vezes mascare o domínio das grandes potências. O Diálogo Meliano

de Tucídides capta este desequilíbrio de forma muito clara. O exemplo mais próximo do nosso

tempo é o Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas, que simboliza como, com a retórica da

soberania, a desigualdade estrutural é ocultada. Em contrapartida, a anarquia soft oferece a

explicação oposta: um sistema que permite a cooperação sem a necessidade de anular a

natureza anárquica da política global. O realismo estrutural de Kenneth Waltz argumenta que

os Estados, isoladamente, agem para sobreviver num ecossistema de autoajuda. A anarquia

soft altera essa suposição; ela enfatiza que, dentro das plataformas regionais, o poder pode

ser compartilhado. Em vez de se submeterem a uma hierarquia global, os Estados podem agir

por meio de organizações regionais. Nesse cenário, os Estados conseguem preservar a

soberania, enquanto muitos alcançam uma cooperação aprimorada. A afirmação de Alexander

Wendt, «a anarquia é o que os Estados fazem dela», apoia este modelo, alegando que, se a

estrutura é construída socialmente, então pode ser suavizada com a agência regional. Assim,

a anarquia suave incorpora a noção de Rousseau de vontade coletiva e a «sociedade

anárquica» de Bull reformulada para o nível regional. Aqui, o poder passa de uma ferramenta

de soma zero para um instrumento partilhado de governação. A anarquia suave não é uma

utopia; em vez disso, a utopia é gerir a volatilidade global. Ela fornece um conceito em que o

mundo não está mais dividido em 193 atores, mas sim agrupado em blocos cooperativos com

a capacidade de restaurar a ordem. É uma forma de convite para perceber a ordem na

anarquia e a cooperação dentro da soberania.

Palavras-chave

Anarquia soft, Organizações Regionais, Ordem Internacional, Anarquia e Hierarquia, Poder e

Cooperação.

How to cite this article

Uygur, Mehmet Recai, Baskın, Yusuf Zakir & Tekin, Fatih (2025). Soft Anarchy: Balancing

Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations.

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations, VOL. 16, Nº.

2, TD1, December 2025, pp. 149-168. https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.DT0525.8

Article submitted on 24th May 2025 and accepted for publication on 11st August 2025.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

151

SOFT ANARCHY: BALANCING SOVEREIGNTY, REGIONALISM, AND

GLOBALIZATION

MEHMET RECAI UYGUR

YUSUF ZAKIR BASKIN

FATIH TEKIN

Introduction

The international system has oriented itself as anarchic, or the absence of any central

authority to control relations among sovereign entities. This situation has been depicted,

for example, with close to 193 states, each of which operates in a self-help system

characterised by low trust and high conflict (Waltz, 1979). While symbolically grounded

in a UN figure, this snapshot betrays the more disorderly nature of world politics. The

contemporary international order is not merely a homogeneous plain filled with equal

sovereigns, but rather a diverse constellation of actors which includes: states, regional

entities, international organisations, multinational companies, non-profit organisations,

and even transnational epistemic networks (Barnett & Finnemore, 2004; Keohane & Nye,

1977). Apart from being anarchical, it is also messy, splintered, and lacking consistent

norms.

In this multifaceted domain, the traditional understanding of anarchy neglects how global

power is spatially organised and exercised. While there is no overarching single authority,

the notion of nearly 200 fragmented and hostile units errantly oversimplifies the world

and conceals emerging patterns of cooperation. This paper introduces soft anarchy as a

corrective: a vision of the international system where anarchy remains the central

structure, but is increasingly mediated by regional consolidation. Rather than viewing

global politics as a network of self-contained sovereign states, soft anarchy suggests a

framework in which authority is “zipped” into regional clusters — 7 to 9 functional blocs

composed of cooperating states. These blocs are not sovereign-less; they serve to

streamline sovereignty into less chaotic and more durable structures.

In this newly organised configuration, the international order is not ruled by a world

state, nor does it exist in purely Hobbesian anarchical self-help terms. Instead, the

system is progressing toward a form of multilayered governance where regional powers

function as semi-autonomous stabilisers. These regional organisations counterbalance

disparities in power, promote mechanisms of trust, and facilitate cooperative action in a

plethora of domains such as trade, climate, migration, and security. These regional units

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

152

do not fully resolve anarchy, but transform it–from an unregulated contest of all against

all to bounded pluralism where sovereignty is not relinquished but is exercised in relation

to others (Bull, 1977; Wendt, 1992).

Figure 1. International Anarchical System (Hard Anarchy)

Source: Created by authors

Figure 2. International Anarchical System (Soft Anarchy)

Source: Created by Authors

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

153

The joint resilience of regions and states, accompanied by strong regional integration,

defines soft anarchy. The Morgenthau power theory is limited to the perceptions of

dividing power within states rather than governments clustering and sharing power

through regional orders. This shift offers new room to navigate between the idealism of

cosmopolitan governance and classical realism. As Kenneth Waltz claimed, states are

forced to maximise their capabilities due to the survival instinct in anarchy, while soft

anarchy counters that survival may also rely on strong regional interdependencies (Waltz,

1979).

This study employs a conceptual-analytical approach based on three frameworks: (1)

structural realism, to ground the argument within the enduring logic of anarchy; (2)

constructivism, specifically Wendt’s assertion that “anarchy is what states make of it”

(Wendt, 1992, p. 395), to posit that softening anarchy is a matter of agency; and (3) a

historical-institutionalist perspective to show the evolution of regional organizations as

responses to systemic fragmentation and hegemonic exhaustion (Ruggie, 1993). The

analysis, however, sustains the focus on empirical developments: the EU’s legal-political

machinery, ASEAN’s informal consensus culture, and the AU’s efforts at continental

solidarity.

This study does not seek to regionalize the world any more than it is, nor negate

competition between geopolitical forces. It seeks, instead, to reconstruct the

international system not as a brutalized stage of 193 disconnected sovereigns, but as a

contested and dynamic order of intersecting regional frameworks. In doing so, it attempts

to shift focus from the binaries of order versus anarchy; state versus institution;

sovereignty versus cooperation towards the edges of a more nuanced global anarchy.

To achieve empirical rigor and analytical precision, we now specify our methodological

framework and the criteria guiding case selection. A transparent delineation of our

regional examples serves to link the theoretical exposition of soft anarchy to a coherent,

systematically justified evidentiary base.

Methodology and Case Selection

This investigation is primarily conceptual–analytical, deploying a theory-driven case

illustration model to elucidate causal mechanisms (Ruggie, 1993; Barnett & Finnemore,

2004). We integrate structural realism (Waltz, 1979) and constructivist ontologies

(Wendt, 1992) within the tradition of the English School (Bull, 1977) and subsequently

scrutinize our propositions through regional organizations deliberately chosen to

maximize variation in institutional depth and norm-generating procedures.

Case-selection parameters.

We identify regional organizations along the following dimensions:

a. Institutional density, measured by the richness of rules, organs, and adjudicative

bodies;

b. Normative procedures, contrasting consensus with majority rule (Rosamond, 2014;

Jones, 2015);

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

154

c. Policy ambit, encompassing security, trade, and social dimensions;

d. Enforcement potential, combining monitoring mechanisms and sanctioning abilities

(Hartzenberg, 2011);

e. Inclusiveness of membership and the resulting distributional consequences;

f. The presence and influence of a regional hegemon (Lake & Morgan, 1997; Reus-Smit,

2005); and

g. Mutually reinforcing interdependence (Keohane & Nye, 1977).

Illustrative cases

1- The European Union displays high institutional density and employs qualified

majority voting (Rosamond, 2014).

2- The Association of Southeast Asian Nations exhibits a low to medium density,

relies on consensus, and adheres to a norm of non-interference (Acharya, 2001;

Jones, 2015).

3- The African Union commands a continent-wide ambition, yet faces capacity

constraints and is in the process of refining its legal machinery (Bala, 2017;

Hartzenberg, 2011).

Caution in inference is warranted here. The examples provided are meant to clarify, not

to catalogue completely; they chart regions where soft anarchy seems credible and

regions where it falters. This approach trims conceptual uncertainty without venturing

into overly broad claims.

Soft Anarchy: Conceptual and Theoretical Foundations

Soft anarchy is best understood not as the negation of anarchy, but as its modulation —

a reconfiguration of the anarchic condition through regional aggregation, institutional

buffering, and functional cooperation. Whereas classical anarchy refers to the absence of

a central authority over sovereign states — leading to a system governed by self-help

and power balancing — soft anarchy acknowledges that this structural void is increasingly

filled by regional platforms of coordination. These platforms do not impose hierarchy;

rather, they act as filters that diffuse conflict, mediate competition, and enable shared

governance in specific domains.

Soft Anarchy in the Triangle of Anarchy, Hierarchy, and the International

Community

Instead of an endpoint of a spectrum, soft anarchy is situated as one vertex of a triangle

formed by three forces: anarchy, hierarchy and the international system. Classically,

anarchy equates to statelessness with no structure, while hierarchy is the centre-

periphery distribution of authority found in empires or hegemonic stability models. The

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

155

international community embodies shared norms, values, and rules which transcend

state egoism (Reus-Smit, 2005).

Soft anarchy retains these poles. It assumes the absence of global governance as a

baseline condition, and opposes a globalised hierarchy as unjust, unsustainable, and

morally bankrupt while accepting community engagement through regionalism –

constructing legitimacy and order through politically defined bounded spaces which may

be cultural, historical, or functional. Although these bounded spaces offer no substitute

for global governance, they bolster pragmatic scaffolds toward approximating order in a

profoundly disordered world.

Soft anarchy intersects and builds upon big umbrella theories of International Relations

(IR) by reimagining anarchy from a universal chaotic concept to a regionally governable

one. It combines elements of realism, constructivism, and the English School to depict a

cooperative, multilayered and institutionally organised international system.

Kenneth Waltz’s structural realism (1979) is still perceived as one of the most significant

theories regarding the issue of international anarchy. Waltz emphasised that the

structure of the international system, with its relations of anarchy and distribution of

capabilities, determines the behaviour of states. From this view, self-help necessitated

competition and reduced survival to a focal point of strategic bonding among states. The

notion of soft anarchy, however, challenges this rigid formula. It accepts the framework

restrictions that Waltz outlines, but does not permit all states a uniform reaction. Within

regional frameworks, such as the European Union, security and survival are managed,

albeit institutionally, on a collective basis—something that is greatly under-theorised.

Moreover, soft anarchy, which assumes all states as functionally identical units,

introduces functional differentiation and posits that some states enjoy sheltered regional

arrangements while others have unrestricted exposure to structural forces.

In contrast, Hans Morgenthau's classical realism viewed international relations as an

enduring struggle for dominance stemming from human nature (1948). Morgenthau’s

theory postulates that power is perpetually competitive and cannot be shared. In this

framework, cooperation is weak and always subordinate to the pursuit of national

interest. Soft anarchy departs from this line of reasoning by offering a redefined notion

of power as a form of governance. In the context of regional institutions, power

transcends mere control to encompass shared responsibility and collective resilience.

The justification for soft anarchy draws from Alexander Wendt’s constructivist view,

“anarchy is what states make of it” (1992). Soft anarchy tries to break off from depicting

anarchy as a given and static, in a tangible substance, condition. It attempts to reframe

it as a social structure based on collective norms and identities. Organisations such as

ASEAN and the EU are crucial in changing hostile relationships into cooperative ones

through identity construction and norm diffusion.

Hedley Bull in The Anarchical Society (1977), suggested that states partake in a form of

sociation that is aligned to some societal norms of constitutive rules, diplomacy, and

mutual recognition. Soft anarchy expands upon Bull's ideas but concentrates on the

regions, thus moving the locus of order from global to regional. As global bodies like the

UN suffer more restrictions, regional bodies take on the normative and regulatory

functions that were once envisaged to be performed by a global society. In this context,

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

156

soft anarchy preserves the ethical and institutional spirit of Bull’s work while restructuring

its governance framework to decentralised, regionally rooted governance.

Philosophical and historical perspectives

The ideas of Hobbes, Rousseau, and Thucydides have irrevocably influenced the order of

intellectual relations with their concepts on order, strife, and interaction, which have

become the focal point of consideration. Soft anarchy is not an outright dismissal of these

legacies, but rather attempts to resolve conflicts posited by them as a modern answer to

the age-old Power vs Peace, Autonomy vs Authority, or Realism vs Idealism duality. In

this manner, soft anarchy asserts itself as a philosophical advancement, no longer

premised on the assumption of a continuing “Pax Americana,” but instead drawing on

lessons from the past to address the challenges of an institutionally fragmented and

multipolar world.

From Hobbes’ State of Nature to Regional Constraint

The defining work on the consequences of anarchy remains Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan,

published in 1651. In the absence of a supervising authority, people live in a state of

constant dread of violent death. For a long time, this metaphor has been extended to the

international level, where states are viewed as existing in a complete absence of a global

sovereign, plunging into perpetual chaos. “War of all against all” rationalises a self-

sustaining, militarised system based on deep-rooted distrust.

Hobbes provides the seeds of transformation as well. Instead of perpetual conflict, he

proposes the social contract — a consensus which bestows surrender to a designated

power in exchange for assurance. Even if such a Leviathan doesn’t exist at the global

scale, soft anarchy globalized reinterpretation of Hobbes’ solution assumes not a singular

sovereign but a sprinkled collection of agreements within regionally divided frameworks.

In this case, these regional units do not act as absolute dominators, but as bounded

contract rules. Government decreases unpredictability and volatility while stabilizing

expectations as a miniature Leviathan in defined geographic and normative limits.

Soft anarchy does not disregard the Hobbesian system of thinking; it modifies it instead.

Even in the absence of a singular Leviathan, the international order as a whole function

through a network of semi-sovereign regional systems that uphold consent, constraint,

and collective security. Thus, Hobbes’ answer is not out of date; it has simply been

regionalized.

Rousseau's General Will and the Emergence of Regional Identity

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, unlike Hobbes, framed political legitimacy as resting not in fear,

but in the general will, which denotes a moral obligation that free and equal persons

contractually commit to. Participation in a polity is collective and, thus, constitutes a

shared political future. Therefore, his vision was deeply rooted in self-determination.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

157

Soft anarchy draws upon this Rousseauian ethic with regard to shared purpose and

regional identity. While the projection of general will may be difficult on a global scale, it

can certainly be meaningfully cultivated within regional blocs. The European Union serves

as an example; it is not a mere technocratic arrangement, but a political community

under construction in which states, while retaining sovereignty, decide to pursue shared

norms and a common future. The ASEAN bloc also marks an emerging consensus on

regional norms grounded in the logic of consultation and non-interference.

Thus, soft anarchy provides a new interpretation of Rousseau: sovereignty is not

abolished but reconfigured through voluntary regional agreements. These contracts come

close to approximating the general will, but not in a universal manner; instead, within

systems of functional coherence and normative convergence.

Regional organisations shaped by soft anarchy illustrate Rousseau’s insight that freedom

and unity are interdependent and mutually reinforcing through shared political identity,

economic interdependence, and institutional memory.

Thucydides and the Dialectic of Power and Restraint

The realist preoccupation with power and vulnerability in international relations is

grounded in Thucydides’ account of the Peloponnesian War, particularly the Melian

Dialogue: “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” However,

today’s international system contests this dualistic view. It is no longer depopulated, self-

sufficient states existing in a flat anarchical system; rather, states increasingly dwell

within hierarchical regional blocs, which resemble extended political families. Such

entities, including the EU, ASEAN, and the African Union, transform threat perceptions

and redistribute power within shared structures of governance.

In a regionally structured system, unilateral aggression remains costly for the unilateral

aggressor, and as such, it would be deemed deviant behaviour. The logic behind the

system of interdependence encourages the establishment of a legal equilibrium, as well

as a latent collective identity, which mitigates the incentive of hegemony. Aggression

from one state tends to provoke a bloc defence response not only because of alliance

obligations, but also due to sociocultural expectations. The soft anarchy approach

neutralises the balance of power, embracing scholarly asymmetries while working to

counteract their influence through extensive collaboration.

This particular model represents the world as divided into regions where relations among

countries, albeit softened through collective governance, remain hierarchical. There still

exists a semblance of power, but it is increasingly diffused through the veil of institutional

legitimacy. Regionalism not only constructs a policy framework within a region; it

changes the rationality dynamics: intra-bloc rivalry becomes self-evidently irrational,

while external subjugation becomes ever more elusive.

Considering the changes which have occurred in the international system, starting from

Westphalia to the present-day post-hegemonic instability, it becomes apparent that

multilateral sovereignty is both fragmented and fluid. This movement is accompanied by

soft anarchy, which attempts to find balance between rigid nationalism and globalist

utopia. Soft anarchy supports regionalism and multi-layered governance as responses to

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

158

disorder, where regional organisations act as stabilising anchors. Rather than intricate

blueprints, soft anarchy makes do with layers of adaptive processes of interdependence

created by countless actors who put in place overlapping frameworks of ordered structure

within disorder.

Similarities and Differences Between Kant’s Idea of Perpetual Peace and

the Concept of Soft Anarchy

One of Kant’s final philosophical works, Perpetual Peace, was published in 1795. In this

work, Kant outlines a blueprint for a universal peace that would encompass all global

citizens. Perpetual Peace is composed of six preliminary articles, three definitive articles,

and several appendices. The work, in its essence, reflects a political ambition aimed at

achieving lasting peace. Within the framework of political and ethical relations, Kant

identifies the conditions under which perpetual peace might be attained. The six

preliminary articles outlined in the first section of the work are as follows;

I. No Treaty of Peace Shall Be Held Valid in Which There Is Tacitly Reserved Matter

for a Future War

II. No Independent States, Large or Small, Shall Come under the Dominion of

Another State by Inheritance, Exchange, Purchase, or Donation

III. Standing Armies (miles pepetuus) shall in Time Be Totally Abolished

IV. National Debts Shall Not Be Contracted with a View to External Friction of States

V. No State Shall by Force Interfere with the Constitution or Government of Another

State

VI. No State Shall, during War, Permit Such Acts of Hostility Which Would Make

Mutual Confidence in the Subsequent Peace Impossible: Such Are the

Employment of Assassins, Poisoners, Breach of Capitulation, and Incitement to

Treason in the Opposing State

The second section of Perpetual Peace presents the definitive articles for achieving

perpetual peace, which are as follows:

I. The Civil Constitution of Every State Should Be Republican

II. The Law of Nations Shall be Founded on a Federation of Free States

III. The Law of World Citizenship Shall Be Limited to Conditions of Universal

Hospitality

In Perpetual Peace, Kant discusses important concepts of reason, the state, citizenship,

justice, law, legislation, and contract. He believes that the default state for individuals is

one of possible conflict, meaning that peace is something that needs political and legal

frameworks to be intentionally constructed. To Kant, individuals may be forced to follow

laws in order to avoid conflict. This aligns with the theory of soft anarchy, which argues

that the international system’s natural state is one of dormant conflict without a central

governing body. Soft anarchy stresses the need for regional cooperation and

organizations in the promotion of order and stability to deal with this issue.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

159

Both theories oppose hegemonic rule. Kant argues that no single state should dominate

another, and soft anarchy opposes the structure of the UN Security Council and the

hegemony of the five permanent members. Rather, soft anarchy favours a more

decentralized governance model through regional systems such as the European Union,

which operate on consensus or qualified majority voting.

Kant imagines a cosmopolitan legal framework founded on republican governments as

well as a global federation of states. On the other hand, soft anarchy posits that while

anarchy is persistent, it may be mitigated through rational institutional cooperation. The

EU and NATO serve as examples for Kant’s model. They provide more relevance and

practicality than Kant’s idealistic blueprint. To conclude, Kant’s Perpetual Peace offers a

distinctly utopian approach to global governance, while soft anarchy provides a more

realistic, grounded approach which acknowledges the existence of anarchy and attempts

to alleviate its prevalence.

Historical and Current Analyses of Regional Security Organisations

In the scope of international relations literature, two central criteria stand out in defining

a region. The first is material or geographic, which locates a region spatially on the world

map, most often a landmass or maritime area. From this perspective, a region is a

bounded geographic space containing two or more states (Mansfield & Milner, 1999). The

second criterion offers a more normative approach to regions, which, while still

geography-based, focuses on a dominant recurring system of interactions in trade,

security, and economics. These interactions are often due to common ethnic, cultural, or

religious ties (Hettne & Söderbaum, 2002).

Scholars have observed that regional organisations and regional integration movements

became more pronounced features of the international system after the 1950s (Fawcett,

2008). This was initially driven by Europe’s desire to overcome, or mitigate, the impact

of another brutal dispute in Europe after World War II, but the logic of regionalism

eventually spread everywhere. The historical development of regionalism can be

understood in two parts (Wunderlich, 2007). The first part, from the 1950s until the late

1980s, was characterised by the Cold War. The nature of international relations during

this time was survival-centric. States concentrated on their very existence, like worrying

about the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the deterrence strategy employed (Walt,

1991). All these gave rise to certain regional organisations like NATO, SEATO, CENTO,

and the Warsaw Pact, which focused mostly on addressing these daunting security

problems. Also, the EEC, while primarily aimed at economic integration, had a more

critical agenda of enhancing and ensuring adequate security so that no conflict could

arise in Europe (Erdoğan, 2008).

The second period, commencing in the 1980s, shifted focus from strategic priorities to

more economic ones. With the relaxation of Cold War tensions and the rise of

globalisation, the attention of regional organisations turned towards economies and

trade. There was a growing perception that regional integration would increase the

shared economic efficiency (Ateş, 2022). This period saw the creation of economic

organisations such as NAFTA, GAFTA, MERCOSUR, and APEC. The EU, ASEAN, AU, and

Arab League also deepened their frameworks to deal with comprehensive regional issues.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

160

While proximity is still the primary consideration in the establishment of regional

organisations, it is not the only one. More often, a combination of shared political,

economic, and social objectives is more determinative. Today, regional organisations can

be classified broadly into three main areas of concentration: political, economic, or

security. Political organisations cover wider scope issues, economic organisations focus

on fostering development and integration, while security organisations concentrate on

collective defence from internal and external aggression (Ateş, 2022).

Soft anarchy in the context of security and military cooperation

One of the mainstream theories in international relations, realism, interprets the

international system as an anarchic environment and considers states as the primary

actors in this anarchic setting. These actors, due to the anarchic structure of the

international system, seek to enhance their national power capabilities, leading to a

pursuit of power maximisation. As a result, this transforms into a power struggle where

"everyone is at war with everyone." Consequently, the "security dilemma" emerges

(Tang, 2009). According to Kenneth Waltz's Theory of International Politics, a balance of

power is necessary to prevent wars in an anarchic international system. It is assumed

that the balance of power between the United States and the Soviet Union during the

Cold War prevented a potential hot conflict. The concept of Soft Anarchy also emphasises

regional and collective security organisations as solutions to security issues arising from

the anarchic structure of the international system.

The Concept of Collective Security in the Soft Anarchy Model

The concepts of Soft Anarchy and Collective Security can be viewed as complementary

to each other. Collective security is a security strategy that provides deterrence. The

concept of collective security is based on the idea that every state within the system has

an equal right to security, and the goal is to ensure the security of all states. Collective

security is achieved when each member state activates its security elements against a

threatening state (Delahunty, 2007). The foundations of this concept of collective

security can be traced back to Kant's Perpetual Peace. This approach, realised with the

establishment of the League of Nations by U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, is now

represented by the United Nations. Collective security is based on the political positions

of states with the aim of maintaining and preserving peace in matters concerning global

security (Yılmaz, 2017)

In the concept of soft anarchy, collective security is achieved through regional security

organisations rather than a global federation. Cooperation and regional organisations

serve to mitigate hard anarchy and bring balance to the system. This balance also

prevents any single state or a few states from dominating the entire international system.

The concept of soft anarchy does not view security as a zero-sum game. The gain of one

state should not result in the loss of others. Soft anarchy approaches security as a win-

win situation. This reduces the security dilemma. To achieve this, cooperation, norms,

and measures that enhance security are required. This makes collective security possible.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

161

NATO, CSTO and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation: Regional Security

Perspectives

This section focuses on the NATO, CSTO and SCO regional security organisations,

detailing their formation and objectives on the basis of fostering cooperation and tackling

common challenges within the region.

The North Atlantic Treaty explicitly marks 4th of April 1949, as NATO’s founding date,

having been signed by 12 members with 32 countries as part of the alliance. Its major

goal is to safeguard the political and military freedom of all member states while

upholding collective defence. As prescribed in Article five of the founding treaty, all

members consider an armed conflict towards one member as an attack against the

alliance and are bound to aid the conflicted partner, whether politically or militarily. This

was only invoked during the 9/11 terror attacks on America (Sonmezoğlu et al., 2021;

NATO, 2025). NATO’s sole focus during the Cold War was combating the USSR’s

dominance and halting communism’s expansion (Armaoğlu, 1988). Post-Cold War, NATO

undertook new responsibilities of crisis management and peacekeeping, such as in Bosnia

and Kosovo. Presently, NATO also deals with terrorism, energy and cyber threats, as well

as the spread of arms (NATO, 2025).

Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan convened on May

15, 1992 and founded the CSTO in Tashkent. Article 4 of the treaty to establish the CSTO

states that aggression against one member is aggression towards all. Although originally

intended to foster political and military cooperation, the CSTO transformed into a regional

organisation in 2002, at which point it also received observer status at the UN General

Assembly. Its strategic priorities include collective defence, counterterrorism, border

security, and rapid response to crises (CSTO, 2025).

Formed by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan in 1996, the "Shanghai

Five" became the SCO with the addition of Uzbekistan in 2001. While initially

concentrating on border issues, the SCO’s tasks broadened to fostering peace and

stability as well as a just international order. Emphasis is placed on mutual trust,

collective security, peaceful resolution of conflicts, and relations without confrontation.

Its security agenda targets transnational threats, focusing on terrorism, radicalism, and

separatism, termed by its members as the three main radical threats (Kutlu, 2021).

These organisations, as a collective unit, showcase the means by which regional

frameworks deal with intricate cross-border conflict through provisions of collective

defence, strategic cooperation, and adapting institutional methods based on the

geopolitical situation.

Regional Military Cooperation and Its Impact on the Global Balance of

Power

Regional security frameworks serve as important regional and global security actors in

the development of new centers of power (Lake & Morgan, 1997). They also help forge

alliances and counter prevailing powers. NATO during the Cold War strengthened Western

alliance resistance towards the Soviet Union and reinforced U.S. global leadership (Walt,

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

162

1987). In response, socialist states formed the Warsaw Pact as a counterbalance to U.S.

sway.

These organizations help foster a multipolar international system as they create distinct

poles of power. Thus, NATO embodies the Western security structure's paralysis, while

the Shanghai Cooperation Organization stands as an antithesis to the Western-centered

disorder. Beyond mere cooperation on security, they provide normative frameworks and

act as balancing mechanisms to address asymmetries of power.

Global organizations influence others through collaboration. For instance, NATO has

worked with the United Nations on many missions. NATO's Operation Deliberate Force

during the Bosnian war in 1995, followed by NATO's IFOR and SFOR commands enforcing

the Dayton Agreement, is an example of this cross-institution collaboration (North

Atlantic Treaty Organization, 2024). Also, NATO KFOR in Kosovo operated under the UN

Security Council Resolution 1244 (Chesterman 2002). Furthermore, NATO’s ISAF mission

in Afghanistan under UN mandate demonstrates the intricate intertwining of local and

global efforts toward achieving security and illustrates the globalization of “regionally

integrated” security policies.

Regional Organizations and the Soft Anarchy Model

The processes of regionalization and global governance have both expanded the

opportunities for collective action while maintaining state sovereignty. This situation

depicts a preliminary stage in the erosion of the traditional paradigm of international

anarchy. We witness the emergence of the European Union, ASEAN, and the African

Union as an early or “childhood” phase of the soft anarchy model. After the Cold War,

there was accelerating globalization, coupled with more complex international relations,

which altered the conception of “region.” In spite of this, a lot of the literature on

regionalization still seems to be concerned with a static, bounded-by-geography

definition. In contrast to this view, regions are always being transformed and redefined

by economic and political as well as cultural processes (Levis & Wigen, 1997). Some

(Mansfield and Milner, 1997) stress geographic proximity, while others define it strictly

with preferential trade agreements (Winters, 1999).

The latest trends in regionalization are more complex than previously because they

include both identity and integrity formation alongside economic and security

considerations. The process follows “bottom-up” and “inside-out” patterns of ecological,

economic, and security concerns. There has been a shift into a multipolar world order

with the decline of American hegemony, which now includes significant non-state actor

participation in regionalization (Hettne, 1999).

Global governance is defined as an arrangement of states, international organizations,

private sectors, and civil societies that engage in sociopolitical decision-making at

multiple levels. The paradigm of global governance emerged in the 1990s as a reaction

to economic integration, post-socialist transitions, and the stagnation of the Western-

centric order (Murphy, 2014: 23-24). However, the persistence of inadequate solutions

to social injustice remains a challenge in broadening the scope of the concept.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

163

There is now a much clearer relationship between global governance and regionalisation.

They both involve multi-actor, multi-level frameworks that are distilled from local

realities. Regional organizations, the European Union, and ASEAN strive to foster peace,

democracy, human rights, and further economic integration. These regions enhance their

governance structures in response to global challenges, like climate change, migration,

and global health pandemics, which illustrates the interplay of regional and global

governance systems.

In terms of explaining the evolution of membership norms, conceptual approaches are

very useful for analyzing regional integration. Considered from a purely geographic or

cultural standpoint, boundaries are negotiated through the interactions of member

countries and supranational bodies. Through these negotiations, shared criteria are

established which determine state eligibility for membership, thus providing strong

political motivation at the time of application. There are two critical moments that I have

not yet covered, and that have received inadequate scholarly attention: the moment

when the members decide their criteria, and the moment they designate a certain state

as eligible. These decisions are politically important, even if they are not legal norms

(Thomas, 2021: 226).

The European Union represents a distinct and intricate model of regional integration.

Beginning with the Paris Treaty of 1951, the EU grew through normative and institutional

shifts into a system of multi-level governance. It incorporates European Commission

legislative proposals, the Council and Parliament co-decision process, the President of

the European Council’s strategic direction, and authoritative jurisprudence from the

European Court of Justice (Rosamond, 2014: 252). The EU moved beyond purely

economic objectives to social rights and citizenship policies, which in turn altered the

political and legal order. Deepened integration occurred through the 1957 Rome Treaties,

the 1965 Merger Treaty, and then the Maastricht Treaty, which expanded integration into

areas previously considered sovereign. Still, issues of democratic legitimacy, social

opposition, and differentiated integration demonstrate the EU's flexible and multi-layered

nature (Rosamond, 2014: 253–254). With regard to competitive and financial services,

environmental protection, and competition, the EU remains a global normative power

(Rosamond, 2014: 256–258).

Other regional models like ASEAN and the African Union (AU) provide alternative

pathways. ASEAN has realized considerable integration with its “ASEAN way.” It achieves

integration through consensus, emphasized consultation and non-interference

(Korwatanasakul, 2020; Ting & Yongkun, 2023). ASEAN has also enhanced regional

stability and prosperity through the ASEAN Free Trade Area and ASEAN Economic

Community, which facilitates the free movement of goods, services, investment, and

skilled labor (Durahman, 2016; Prajanto, 2022). It is also ASEAN’s “open regionalism”

policy that builds relationships with the rest of the world’s economic superpowers

(Pangestu & Ing, 2016).

The African Union (AU) has wider political and economic goals like achieving continental

integration and enhancing global relevance (Bala, 2017). Strengthening democracy,

governance, and development is further enabled by the Pan-African Parliament and

African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, as well as the African Union Commission.

The AU is active in politics and security, concentrating on preventative and remedial

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

164

measures concerning conflicts. In addition, the AU encourages integration through the

African Continental Free Trade Area (Hartzenberg, 2011).

These regional frameworks defy conventional definitions of sovereignty and illustrate the

interaction of regionalism, national self-determination, and global integration (Holsti,

2016; He, 2004). The relationship is further heightened by technological innovations and

economic interdependence, which serve as both centripetal and centrifugal forces

(Baluev, 2014). EU, ASEAN, and Mercosur regional blocs amplify bargaining power,

although some transfer of authority is required (Pentland, 1975). There is still a lack of

balance in power and structural constraints; nonetheless, these models serve as early

indicators of “soft anarchy,” where some cooperative order is obtainable without

complete surrender of sovereignty. Should integration proceed, a future where soft

anarchy is more fully realized is possible.

Conclusion and Discussion

The international system is still formally anarchy, but now exists within a network of

states, regional blocs and transnational relations that is more intricate and

interconnected than ever. The soft anarchy model reclassifies this intricacy as not a loss

of sovereignty but a collective recalibration. Instead of absorbing anarchy through a

single central authority, it fosters cooperative regional clusters where power is shifted,

tempered, and redistributed.

“Strong vs. weak” distinctions become irrelevant within this framework, as once smaller

states are able to exert their influence, greater traditional structures provide access. The

EU, ASEAN, and African Union are examples of regional organisations that serve as new

forms of post-Westphalian order, lessening unilateralism and conflict. Order is maintained

without hierarchy within semi-autonomous, interlinked regions, as soft anarchy

propagates the horizontal distribution of power.

Soft anarchy reconceptualises economic and security disorder in the international system

as an arena in which overlapping regional norms and governance networks, rather than

a singular global authority, stabilise order while preserving state autonomy. Our

integrative model combines realist constraints (Waltz 1979) concerning the anarchically

competitive logic of survival; ontological securities and role conception (Wendt 1992);

and normative society-building processes (Bull 1977). Regionally concentrated goods

such as transnational trade security, counter-migration coordination, and uniform

collective defence raise sufficiently shared external perceptions that actors can

subordinate rival preferences to the management of common risks. Competently crafted

regional institutions can then narrow transaction costs, fortify commitment credibility,

and channel disputes into bounded adjudication. Structures that mediate between strict

majority and pure consensus, independent verification that discourages opportunistic

non-compliance, and redistributive mechanisms that mitigate asymmetries in gains

together fortify the model’s empirical purchase.

Nonetheless, soft anarchy encounters circumscribed applicability. Abstention on

demanding consensus may incapacitate a region at critical junctures; a singular hegemon

may skew institutional advantages and dictate asymmetrical costs; and indebtedness,

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

165

literacy, or bureaucratic capacity may continue to circumscribe enforcement and policy

follow-through. Such weaknesses are magnified when intra-regional inequalities deny

vulnerable members distributive access to the produce of cooperation, or when secured

reputational legacies of historic conflict erode the reciprocal trust that reciprocity

theorists and security communities presuppose. Awareness of these disequilibria remains

vital, for the very governance frameworks that permit collective action may equally

consolidate hegemonic order and consolidate defects of marginalisation if not

continuously subjected to countervailing scrutiny and reform.

Scholarly attention should now turn to rigorously assessing the model’s claims in diverse

geographical contexts, prioritising the interplay between sovereignty pooling,

institutional density, and the differential capacity of governance structures to mitigate

conflict. For policymakers, the imperative is to construct regional frameworks in which

collective engagement emerges as the rational baseline, underpinned by rules and

redistribution mechanisms that render participation advantageous to every constituent

state. If calibrated to the empirical preconditions of any given milieu, the logic of soft

anarchy can furnish a credible trajectory toward regional stability—one that recognises

the continuing presence of anarchy while directing its dynamics into institutionalised,

just, and durable patterns of order.

References

Acharya, A. (2001). Constructing a security community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and

the problem of regional order (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Armaoğlu, F. (1988). 20. Yüzyıl Siyasi Tarihi: 1914–1980. Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası

Kültür Yayınları.

Ateş, D. (2022). Uluslararası Örgütler; Devletlerin Örgütlenme Mantığı. Bursa: Dora

Yayınları.

Bala, M. T. (2017). The challenges and prospects for regional and economic integration

in West Africa. Asian Social Science, 13(5), 24. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v13n5p24

Baluev, D. (2014). Shifts in the meaning of sovereignty and applicability of the concept

for analysis of contemporary world politics. Asian Social Science, 11(3), 212–217.

https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n3p212

Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the world: International organisations in

global politics. Cornell University Press.

Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society: A study of order in world politics. Columbia

University Press.

Chesterman, S. (2002). Legality Versus Legitimacy: Humanitarian Intervention, the

Security Council, and the Rule of Law. Security Dialogue, 33(3), 293–307.

CSTA. (2025). The Collective Security Treaty Organisation. https://en.odkb-

csto.org/25years/ (E.T. 26.01.2025).

Delahunty, J. R. (2007). Paper Charter: Self-defence and the failure of the United Nations

Collective Security System. Catholic University Law Review, 56(3), 131.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

166

Elumbre, A. L. (2019). Conjunctures on “ASEAN citizenship” 1967–2017: Identities,

ideas, institutions. Asian International Studies Review, 20(1), 63–89.

Erdoğan, M. M. (2008). Türkiye ile Avrupa Ekonomik Topluluğu / Avrupa Birliği

İlişkilerinde Değişmeyen Öncelikler. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi (52), 123–140.

Fawcett, L. (2008). Regional Institutions. In P. D. Williams (Ed.), Security Studies: An

Introduction. Routledge.

Hartzenberg, T. (2011). Regional integration in Africa. WTO Working Papers.

https://doi.org/10.30875/fad9df15-en

He, B. (2004). East Asian ideas of regionalism: A normative critique. Australian Journal

of International Affairs, 58(1), 105–125.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1035771032000184791

Hettne, B. (1999). The new regionalism: A prologue. In B. Hettne, A. Inotai, & O. Sunkel

(Eds.), Globalism and the new regionalism: Volume 1 (pp. xv–xxix). Palgrave Macmillan.

Hettne, B., & Söderbaum, F. (2000). Theorising the Rise of Regionness. New Political

Economy, 5(3), 457–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/713687778

Hobbes, T. (1996). Leviathan (R. Tuck, Ed.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work

published 1651). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511817700

Holsti, K. J. (2016). Internationalism and nationalism within the multi-community state.

In Major texts on war, the state, peace, and international order (Vol. 42, pp. 105–126).

Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28818-5_8

Jones, D. M. (2015). ASEAN and the limits of regionalism in Pacific Asia. SSRN Electronic

Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2569176

Kant, I. (1917). Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Essay (3rd ed.). London: George Allen

& Unwin Ltd.

Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and interdependence: World politics in

transition. Little, Brown and Company.

Korwatanasakul, U. (2020). Revisiting Asian economic integration: Challenges and

prospects. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 27(2), 199–222.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13547860.2020.1840493

Kutlu, E. (2021). İkili Anlaşmadan Bölgesel İşbirliğine: Şangay İş birliği Örgütü. Avrasya

Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 8(3), 533–553.

Lake, A. D., & Morgan, M. P. (1997). Regional Orders: Building Security in a New World.

Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press.

Levis, M. W., & Wigen, K. E. (1997). The myth of continents: A critique of

metageography. University of California Press.

Mansfield, E. D., & Milner, H. V. (1997). The political economy of regionalism. Columbia

University Press.

Mansfield, E. D., & Milner, H. V. (1999). The New Wave of Regionalism. International

Organisation, 53(3), 589–627. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2601291

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

167

Morgenthau, H. J. (1948). Politics among nations: The struggle for power and peace.

Alfred A. Knopf.

Murphy, C. N. (2014). The emergence of global governance. In T. G. Weiss & R. Wilkinson

(Eds.), International organisation and global governance (pp. 23–34). Routledge.

NATO. (2025). Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_68144.htm? (E.T. 25.03.2025).

NATO. (2025). Past operations and missions.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52060.htm (E.T. 25.03.2025).

North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. (2024, March 21). Peace support operations in Bosnia

and Herzegovina (1995–2004). NATO.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52122.htm

Pangestu, M., & Ing, L. Y. (2016). ASEAN: Regional integration and reforms. Asian

Economic Papers, 15(2), 44–60. https://doi.org/10.1162/asep_a_00424

Pentland, C. (1975). The regionalisation of world politics: Concepts and evidence.

International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 30(4), 599–630.

https://doi.org/10.2307/40201270

Prajanto, B. (2022). Impact of ASEAN economic integration on investment in the ASEAN

region. Journal of Asia Pacific Studies, 6(2), 115–126.

https://doi.org/10.33541/japs.v6i2.4165

Reus-Smit, C. (2005). Liberal hierarchy and the license to use force. Review of

International Studies, 31(S1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210505006708

Rosamond, B. (2000). Theories of European integration. Palgrave Macmillan.

Rosamond, B. (2014). The European Union. In T. G. Weiss & R. Wilkinson (Eds.),

International organisation and global governance (pp. 251–264). Routledge.

Rousseau, J.-J. (2012). The social contract (C. Betts, Trans.). Oxford University Press.

(Original work published 1762).

Ruggie, J. G. (1993). Territoriality and beyond: Problematizing modernity in international

relations. International Organisation, 47(1), 139–174.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300004702

Sonmezoğlu, F., Güneş, H., & Keleşoğlu, E. (2021). Uluslararası İlişkilere Giriş. İstanbul:

Der Yayınları.

Tang, S. (2009). The Security Dilemma: A Conceptual Analysis. Security Studies, 18(3),

587–623.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. (2025). General Information.

https://eng.sectsco.org/20170109/192193.html (E.T. 01.2025).

Thomas, D. C. (2021). The limits of Europe: Membership norms and the contestation of

regional integration. Oxford University Press.

Thucydides. (1996). The Peloponnesian War (R. Warner, Trans.; M. I. Finley, Ed.).

Penguin Classics. (Original work written ca. 400 BCE).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 2, TD1

Thematic Dossier - Emerging Powers In-between Global and Regional Organizations

December 2025, pp. 149-168

Soft Anarchy: Balancing Sovereignty, Regionalism, and Globalization

Mehmet Recai Uygur, Yusuf Zakir Baskın, Fatih Tekin

168

Ting, C., & Yongkun, L. (2023). Why can ASEAN promote sustainable development

cooperation? Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, 66(2).

https://www.scielo.br/j/rbpi/a/WMMptQpGYQy8pSJ3f4QY5Qz/?lang=en

Walt, S. M. (1987). The origins of alliances. Cornell University Press.

Walt, S. M. (1991). The Renaissance of Security Studies. International Studies Quarterly,

35(2), 211–239. https://doi.org/10.2307/2600471

Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. McGraw-Hill.

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power

politics. International Organisation, 46(2), 391–425.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027764

Winters, L. A. (1999). Regionalism vs. multilateralism. In R. Baldwin, D. Cohen, A. Sapir,

& A. Venables (Eds.), Market integration, regionalism, and the global economy (pp. 5–

49). Cambridge University Press.

Wunderlich, J. U. (2008). Regionalism, Globalisation and International Order: Europe and

Southeast Asia (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315604459

Yılmaz, S. (2017). Uluslararası Güvenlik. İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları.