Description
This paper delves into the divergence between realist perspectives on survival and critiques from realist-constructivist scholars. Through a synoptic examination of surrender processes in the Peloponnesian War and WWII Japan, it challenges the simplistic view that survival is merely an objective or inconsequential concept, emphasizing the often-overlooked element of recognition. Interweaving realist considerations of the 'will of the other' with insights from war studies, the paper reveals that surrender involves a recognition component crucial for war termination and peace-formation, extending beyond mere physical survival or profit concerns. The synoptic analysis illustrates that states may surrender not solely for physical survival or profit but also to secure recognition for perceived essential values. These cases demonstrate how a reconciliation discourse, grounded in recognition rather than mere capitulation, can help reshape domestic balances of power, foster symbolic politics, and influence peace-formation towards reconciliation. In conclusion, the paper suggests that exploring surrender cases transforms the assumption of survival into a symbolic concept, challenging realist theories to reconsider their foundational assumptions. It also urges constructivist theories to scrutinize how societies interpret the symbol of survival amid transformative social processes. The paper advocates a departure from the realism-constructivism binary of power-ideals towards a relational constructivism emphasizing the intricate relationship between the human interpretation of concepts like survival and social processes. This shift prompts a critical evaluation of whose perspectives theories objectifying or dismissing the subjectivity of 'survival' may inadvertently prioritize.
