Calling for a less ‘brandish’ and less ‘grand’ reconvention

The Forum should not be too cosy, said the editors. But in many regards, Barry Buzan's invitation to put to better use the resources of the English School makes criticism difficult. Who is going to oppose, in principle, a more concentrated effort in international theorizing, methodological pluralism, substantial openness to sister fields and disciplines, linked to a general endeavour for giving some coherence to the diverging theoretical interests? Moreover, who can criticize the very fact that somebody wants to pool existing resources for pursuing research, before seeing the outcome?

Hence, the following remarks can hardly be against the open project as such, which I wish much success. It will be directed against some particular ways to fill it out, ways which are often, I think, not intended by Buzan himself. In other words, the discussion is as much about analysing Buzan's paper as about pre-empting particular ways to read it. To caricature the position: if the project becomes understood as too English and US-targeted, too encompassing and too traditional, the English School might well remain an underexploited resource.