This special issue of Relaciones Internacionales takes as its objective the reimagining of what are and what could be queer/cuir and trans/feminist perspectives in Spanish, and explore what are and what could be its contributions to the study and practice of international relations. Thus, in this special issue we shall deliberately avoid giving a reduced definition of what queer/cuir and trans/feminist perspectives could be to open the way to a multiplicity of voices, interpretations, translations and methodologies that have been constructed or which can be constructed under these terms.

The academic journal Relaciones Internacionales is pleased to announce a call for Issue 57, dedicated to reflection on the space of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ and from theories of International Relations. The objective of the issue is to go beyond the traditional geopolitical debate and showcase the diversity of theoretical positions, especially from critical perspectives, which reflect on how (or not) the Indo-Pacific has been defined as a unique regional space, whose normative, institutional, discursive, ideological and identity dynamics are framing the relations between states and societies which conform to that space.

The Editorial Team presents, as is tradition, the call for papers of its annual open issue , corresponding to number 56 of the journal, with expected publication in June 2024 . In line with the general editorial line of the journal, this issue will prioritize the publication of new work that tackles questions of politics, culture, history, economy, and society, and that is centred on the academic field of international relations. Nonetheless, research that approaches these questions from other fields of the social sciences (political science, history, law, economics, sociology, anthropology) will also be considered, although it should always have a bearing on the international.

The objective of issue 55 is to analyse the transformation of the international peace-building agenda. In the last decade, peace-building has passed from an increase in offensive military operations for the imposition of peace, to the non-authorization of these missions, in a notable number of years. The wide spectrum of objectives associated with liberal peace have been limited to preparations for war, and, in absence of these measures, civil and development programmes have been prioritized that could be seen as a way of maintaining such a presence. At any rate, this is at some distance from the commitments of previous decades. The dividends that these changes have reaped regarding peace and stability in the short term have been limited, and it does not seem that they are going to improve in the long term. As we are going to see next, the literature has been exhaustive when analysing what is happening to the liberal peace and what are the new parameters under which the missions operate.

The objective of issue 54 is to broaden the horizons and depths of reflection that IR can contribute to the interdisciplinary debate on (im)mobility and power in the World today. The nature itself of international relations evokes, necessarily, multiple (im)mobilities of people (e.g. diplomats, armies, scientists, missionaries, traders, slaves), raw materials (gold, silver, minerals, gas, food, herbs and spices), manufactured products, works of art and ideas (e.g. progress, civilization, development). In other words, the “relations” of “the international” have been historically traversed by policies and governments of (im)mobility. However, it is a dimension of analysis which is practically unexplored in the field. This call is an invitation to “mobilize IR” or to “think international relations as a practice of kinetic power” through different questions and areas of reflection.

The Editorial Team presents, as is tradition, the call for papers of its annual open issue , corresponding to number 53 of the journal, with expected publication in June 2023 . In line with the general editorial line of the journal, this issue will prioritize the publication of new work that tackles questions of politics, culture, history, economy, and society, and that is centred on the academic field of international relations. Nonetheless, research that approaches these questions from other fields of the social sciences (political science, history, law, economics, sociology, anthropology) will also be considered, although it should always have a bearing on the international.

The central objective of this call for papers for Issue 52 of the journal is to promote a critical reflection on the coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19, from now on) and its many consequences through the diverse theoretical currents of international relations.

The Editorial Team presents, as is tradition, the call for papers of its annual open issue , corresponding to number 51 of the journal, with expected publication in October 2022 . In line with the general editorial line of the journal, this issue will prioritize the publication of new work that tackles questions of politics, culture, history, economy, and society, and that is centred on the academic field of international relations. Nonetheless, research that approaches these questions from other fields of the social sciences (political science, history, law, economics, sociology, anthropology) will also be considered, although it should always have a bearing on the international.

The 50th edition of the journal has the objective of furthering the theoretical discussion around the new directions taken by the discipline, in its inherent desire to confront its ontological insecurity as an academic discipline, and, at the same time, opening itself to other fields of knowledge. It is proposed, therefore, to offer an updated map of critical international relations, of its paradigmatic turns and its new research agendas, and its spaces of theoretical and methodological dialogue with contributions from other social sciences: Sociology, Anthropology, Political Science, History, Law and Philosophy.

The call for papers of the 49th edition of the journal has the objective of showing the theoretical richness of the new theories, methodologies and research agendas that have been flourishing during the last decade within the so-called critical feminism approaches in the discipline of international relations.

As is now customary every year Relaciones Internacionales makes this call for papers of edition 48 as an open edition, and similar to previous publications, Relaciones Internacionales brings together analyses that deal with politics, culture, history, the economy or society, with an emphasis of course on the international. The edition seeks unpublished articles that fulfil the editorial guidelines of the journal, as well as the publication criteria outlined in the journal Style Guide. The editorial line of Relaciones Internacionales advocates dialogue on new perspectives or approaches, and through critical thought and interrogation.

The call for contributions of issues 46 and 47 of the journal is intended to contribute to the global discussion on world-ecology, capitalocene and global accumulation processes.

The  Call for Papers of volume 45  of the journal has positioned  fresh water  at the centre of the debate, and particularly, those reserves from which it is used, or the human being could need in the medium term to carry out diverse productive and every-day activities in their domestic, community or global life. The certainty that fresh water is a cross-curricular element to all aspects of human life means that a global anxiety has been building in the last decades, and because of the transcendental geopolitical, economic, sociocultural or normative aspects of the situation, with growing international concern over access to water, its uses and the right to its exploitation. The objective of this volume of the journal  Relaciones Internacionales  is to politically problematize the element and confront in this regard a necessary interdisciplinary debate about the global geopolitics of water, with a theoretical discussion on the perspectives, tensions and conflicts stirred up by the convergence of interests, values, world views and considerations of fresh water in the international system. It is especially hoped that the authors raise alternative epistemologies for the most widespread conceptions of water in the prevailing liberal-capitalist system, defining or redefining categories, concepts, tensions, notions or uncertainties around the problem.

Final Resolution for the VI Call for Evaluations of FECYT Journals.

While not being monographic, most issues published so far have dealt with specific topics. Issue nº 44, programmed to be published on June 2020, what we propose is an open issue: an issue addressing no specific subject but looking for quality articles that response clearly to the editorial policy and, of course, fulfil the norms of publication stipulated in the journal's style guide. We are looking, then, for unpublished articles the publication of which will entail a significant contribution to the discipline of International Relations, either in theoretical, historical and/or analytical terms.  

The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development Report of 1994 brought the concept of human security on to the international political agenda. As was affirmed then, this was a security which “must be realized through development, not through arms” (p.1). This statement can lead us on to one of the principal characteristics of the concept of human security: it finds its expression in those critical approaches that stand in opposition to the classical conception of security, defined fundamentally in realist terms and centred almost exclusively on the military security of states. Human security had, in its formulation by the UNDP, two main components: freedom from fear, which is required for threats against life and the physical integrity of people; and freedom from want, understood as the provision of the basic needs of people (food, health, and education). The evolution of the concept, which has taken place in parallel to its adoption by the international cooperation agencies of some countries (Canada, Japan), has given rise to two perspectives on human security: the restricted perspective, which places the emphasis on the “protection against physical violence in the context of conflict” (Pérez de Armiño 2007; p. 60), and was driven especially by Canada; and a wider perspective, which also includes freedom from want, and has been supported by Japan and the United Nations. This edition of the journal therefore seeks contributions which analyse the evolution, the reach and the debates arisen around the concept of human security.

The term MENA is an English acronym that refers to the Middle East and North Africa, and is found extensively throughout a great variety of political and academic fields. It is nonetheless a fictitious category, like all territorial categories, and poses multiple questions surrounding its effectiveness for the interpretation of dynamics which increasingly take on a global character, rather than a regional one. What we propose with this edition is: “Rethinking ‘MENA’ from an international perspective.” Leaving to one side these “classical” visions about the region and the traditional way of interpreting it, we seek to attract both theoretical and practical, international or local analyses, that reflect on the diversity and plurality of the region, the sociopolitical transformations or continuities that cross it, along with its internal and external power dynamics. In this sense, we believe that many authors both within and outwith the discipline of international relations provide us with useful tools to examine and deconstruct MENA, its problems, its borders, its history and its security: constructivism, reflectivism, the Frankfurt school, critical theories, Foucauldian genealogy, postcolonialism and critical discourse analysis, amongst others.

Francisco Javier Peñas Esteban, one of the founding members of this journal, and one of the oldest and most active participants, passed away suddenly on the 19th February, 2018. University teacher Peñas was the one who introduced many of us to the theory of international relations, the one who made us read the classics (realism, liberalism and marxism) but, above all, the one who encouraged us to “explore new avenues” which were opening up back in the middle of the 1990s, thanks to a reflectivist and sociological shift. Because of his suggestions, typical of a tireless and avid reader, and someone passionate about the Socratic method, we delved into these new openings and discovered intriguing contributions that schools like social constructivism, postcolonialism, feminism, poststructuralism, critical security studies etc. have brought to the discipline. Professor Peñas had, similarly, another exceptional quality: that of being a true “teacher,” someone who taught us to think, and to question our own beliefs, assumptions, and prior knowledge. It is for these reasons that we would like to dedicate edition 40 of the journal to pay a deserved homage through an engagement with his work, his publications and his teachings. An engagement that, as he would have wanted, is critical and inspired, with the aim of continuing to drive through this journal a critical approach to the discipline of international relations and an understanding of the complex international world that we live in.

The English School, or theory of international society, has seen how some of the central themes of investigation in the field of International Relations have come back strongly in recent years: the concept of international society, the debate between order and justice within international politics, historical accounts of the expansion of international society, and its role as a civilizing standard. Debates about the pluralist character or solidarist capacity of international society, and the analysis of controversial questions related to human rights, humanitarian interventions, and the responsibility to protect (R2P), have also made a significant reappearance.

At the  beginning of the 20th Century, Gandhi's concept of "non-violence" (satyagraha,  that is, active non-violence) broke strongly into the social sciences at the  time of the decolonisation process in India.   During and after the Second World War, the term "resistance" became more  prominent on the international stage thanks to national forces in opposition to  the german occupation of Europe.  Later,  the anti-colonial nationalisms and the subsequent violent de-colonisation  processes in the asian and african continents, together with other political  debates in european society which revolved around the events of May 1968 in  France, established this as a permanent political agenda.

While not being monographics, most issues published so far have dealt with specific topics. Issue nº 38, programmed to be published in June 2018, what we propose is an open issue: an issue addressing no specific subject but looking for quality articles that response clearly to the editorial policy and, of course, fulfill the norms of publication stipulated in the journal's style guide. We are looking, then, for unpublished articles the publication of which will entail a significant contribution to the discipline of International Relations, either in theoretical, historical and/or analytical terms.

The judgment of History by most international relations theorists, especially from USA, is strongly influenced by their training in social sciences. Generally, their research represents models constructed from historical contexts. However, despite this fact, many academics -including some influential intellectuals- have been criticized for postulating laws by ignoring the nuances of history (e.g., Kenneth Waltz).

Since their beginnings, migration studies have been closely linked to the International Relations discipline, especially because people’s transnational movements imply a list of dynamics which, because of their nature, transcend national areas. The most common approaches have ranged from neoclassical economic theories, where migration has been studied as a rational choice of actors in search of an improvement in their living conditions, to theories of dual labour markets that consider the existence of a global division of the labour market where certain occupations would be reserved for migrants. However, since the beginning of the XXIst century a number of critical approaches have burst onto the discipline questioning the classical principles of international migration studies to reflect especially how the evolution of global capitalism is intrinsically linked to mass population movements.

The concept of citizenship, while central for the discipline of Political Science, has also been approached by IR, mainly since the 1980s, in parallel to the advancement of neoliberalism. Among the scholarly research that has shown the potential of IR contributions to this domain are the cosmopolitan proposals developed by authors such as David Held, Andrew Linklater, Marion Young or Thomas Pogge; feminist theory like that of Cynthia Enloe, who analyses how gender relations affect and are affected by international structures and dynamics;  International Political Sociology, which looks at the emergence of borders/boundaries as a model of exclusion and political administration; or critical security studies, which analyse how security practices and logics produce new political subjects in addition to transforming the established order. This plurality of approaches indicates that there are different lines of investigation exploring the influence of global relations on the creation of citizenship as a concept and a concrete array of practices. In line with this interest, we want to dedicate this issue to delve into the dialogue between the discipline of International Relations and the processes of citizenship construction. Contributions exploring the following three domains of research are particularly welcome.