Description
Countries all around the world face the threat of deadly infectious disease outbreaks. Yet even the most elementary international response – naming a new epidemic – triggers diplomatic firestorms because disease names can potentially also stigmatise nations, decimate economies, and perpetuate coloniality. How, then, are disease outbreaks officially named in international relations? What political pressures influence international onomastic practices? Why do names ultimately exert such power in world politics? This paper initiates a new research field it calls international political onomastics to analyse the naming practices around global health emergencies. Such investigation reveals, more broadly, how international relations are onomastic relations.
