ABSTRACT
There seems to be a growing disparity between the practices which comprise international relations, and the conceptual apparatus with which we attempt to analyse these practices. This divergence is most obvious in the case of sudden fundamental change, as in the case of the disappearance of the Soviet Union, or the (re)emergence of the problematique of nationalism. Such cases provide crucial evidence which contravenes the adequacy of our conceptual apparatus and the theories based on it. Nevertheless, denials are more common than serious reconceptualisation. Since Yosef Lapid and I have dealt with this phenomenon, exemplified by the neo-realist treatment of nationalism in a separate paper (Lapid and Kratochwil, 1996), I do not want to rehearse those arguments any further here.
