The underlying causes of strategic surprise in EU foreign policy: a post-mortem investigation of the Arab uprisings and the Ukraine–Russia crisis of 2013/14

IF 2.7 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES European Security Pub Date : 2022-11-11 DOI:10.1080/09662839.2022.2140009
Nikki Ikani, Christoph O. Meyer
{"title":"The underlying causes of strategic surprise in EU foreign policy: a post-mortem investigation of the Arab uprisings and the Ukraine–Russia crisis of 2013/14","authors":"Nikki Ikani, Christoph O. Meyer","doi":"10.1080/09662839.2022.2140009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The study of why and when governments are caught out by strategic surprise has been a major occupation of intelligence studies, international relations, public administration and crisis management studies. Still little is known, however, about the structural vulnerabilities to such surprises in international organisations such as the European Union (EU). EU institutions themselves have not undertaken rigorous investigations or public inquiries of recent strategic surprises, instead relying on internal review processes. In order to understand the most common underlying problems causing surprise in the EU context, this paper adapts and tests insights from the strategic surprise literature. It elaborates a theoretical framework with five hypotheses about why the leadership of EU institutions has been prone to being caught by surprises in foreign affairs: limitations in collection capacity, institutional fragmentation of policymaking, organisational culture, member state politicisation, and cognitive biases arising from collective ideas and norms. These hypotheses are tested using a post-mortem approach investigating two significant strategic surprises: the start and spread of the Arab uprisings of 2010/11 and Ukraine–Russia crisis of 2013/14.","PeriodicalId":46331,"journal":{"name":"European Security","volume":"32 1","pages":"270 - 293"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Security","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2022.2140009","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The study of why and when governments are caught out by strategic surprise has been a major occupation of intelligence studies, international relations, public administration and crisis management studies. Still little is known, however, about the structural vulnerabilities to such surprises in international organisations such as the European Union (EU). EU institutions themselves have not undertaken rigorous investigations or public inquiries of recent strategic surprises, instead relying on internal review processes. In order to understand the most common underlying problems causing surprise in the EU context, this paper adapts and tests insights from the strategic surprise literature. It elaborates a theoretical framework with five hypotheses about why the leadership of EU institutions has been prone to being caught by surprises in foreign affairs: limitations in collection capacity, institutional fragmentation of policymaking, organisational culture, member state politicisation, and cognitive biases arising from collective ideas and norms. These hypotheses are tested using a post-mortem approach investigating two significant strategic surprises: the start and spread of the Arab uprisings of 2010/11 and Ukraine–Russia crisis of 2013/14.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧盟外交政策出现战略意外的根本原因:对2013/14年阿拉伯起义和乌克兰-俄罗斯危机的事后调查
对政府为何以及何时陷入战略意外的研究一直是情报研究、国际关系、公共行政和危机管理研究的一个主要领域。然而,对于欧盟(EU)等国际组织在这种意外情况下的结构性脆弱性,人们仍然知之甚少。欧盟机构本身并没有对最近的战略意外进行严格的调查或公开调查,而是依靠内部审查程序。为了了解在欧盟背景下导致突然性的最常见的潜在问题,本文对战略突然性文献的见解进行了改编和检验。它详细阐述了一个理论框架,其中包含五个假设,以解释为什么欧盟机构的领导层在外交事务中容易遭遇意外:收集能力的限制、政策制定的制度分裂、组织文化、成员国政治化,以及由集体观念和规范引起的认知偏见。这些假设是通过事后分析的方法来检验的,该方法调查了两个重大的战略意外事件:2010/11年阿拉伯起义的开始和蔓延,以及2013/14年乌克兰-俄罗斯危机。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Security
European Security Multiple-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
30
期刊最新文献
Upon entering NATO: explaining defence willingness among Swedes Instrumentalisation of fear and securitisation of “Eastern Borders Route”: the case of Poland-Belarus “border crisis” Serbia between East and West: ontological security, vicarious identity and the problem of sanctions against Russia External, non-governmental resistance in relation to interstate war: an analytical framework Improved conceptualising of hybrid interference below the threshold of armed conflict
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1