‘Broadening’ and ‘deepening’ collective security in times of health crisis: the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Relations Pub Date : 2023-08-30 DOI:10.1177/00471178231196070
Umut Ozguc, Asima Rabbani
{"title":"‘Broadening’ and ‘deepening’ collective security in times of health crisis: the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond","authors":"Umut Ozguc, Asima Rabbani","doi":"10.1177/00471178231196070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the end of the Cold War, the UN’s collective security model has been questioned as to whether it has been well equipped to respond to the changing landscape of global security. By using the UN Security Council’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study, this paper traces the discursive contestations of the traditional understanding of the UN Charter-based collective security model. It examines what meanings the member states collectively attach to public health crises, how they frame the COVID-19 pandemic, and, finally how they consider the role of the Security Council in responding to non-military emergencies. An analysis of the debates by the Council members suggest that there is a slow normative change in the recognition of health security as an indivisible aspect of peace. We argue that the pandemic has created a normative environment for the Council’s members to rethink ‘broadening’ and ‘deepening’ collective security beyond military conflicts to emphasize the Council’s role in addressing health issues, structural inequalities, and other human security threats.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"93 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178231196070","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the end of the Cold War, the UN’s collective security model has been questioned as to whether it has been well equipped to respond to the changing landscape of global security. By using the UN Security Council’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study, this paper traces the discursive contestations of the traditional understanding of the UN Charter-based collective security model. It examines what meanings the member states collectively attach to public health crises, how they frame the COVID-19 pandemic, and, finally how they consider the role of the Security Council in responding to non-military emergencies. An analysis of the debates by the Council members suggest that there is a slow normative change in the recognition of health security as an indivisible aspect of peace. We argue that the pandemic has created a normative environment for the Council’s members to rethink ‘broadening’ and ‘deepening’ collective security beyond military conflicts to emphasize the Council’s role in addressing health issues, structural inequalities, and other human security threats.
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
在卫生危机时期“扩大”和“深化”集体安全:2019冠状病毒病大流行及以后
自冷战结束以来,联合国的集体安全模式一直受到质疑,人们怀疑它是否做好了应对全球安全形势变化的准备。本文以联合国安理会应对2019冠状病毒病大流行为例,追溯了对基于《联合国宪章》的集体安全模式的传统理解的话语争论。它审查了会员国集体赋予公共卫生危机的意义,它们如何定义COVID-19大流行,以及它们如何考虑安全理事会在应对非军事紧急情况方面的作用。对安理会成员辩论的分析表明,在承认卫生安全是和平不可分割的一个方面方面出现了缓慢的规范变化。我们认为,大流行病为安理会成员重新考虑在军事冲突之外“扩大”和“深化”集体安全创造了规范环境,以强调安理会在解决卫生问题、结构性不平等和其他人类安全威胁方面的作用。
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
International Relations
International Relations INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: International Relations is explicitly pluralist in outlook. Editorial policy favours variety in both subject-matter and method, at a time when so many academic journals are increasingly specialised in scope, and sectarian in approach. We welcome articles or proposals from all perspectives and on all subjects pertaining to international relations: law, economics, ethics, strategy, philosophy, culture, environment, and so on, in addition to more mainstream conceptual work and policy analysis. We believe that such pluralism is in great demand by the academic and policy communities and the interested public.
期刊最新文献
A neoclassical realist model of overconfidence and the Japan–Soviet Neutrality Pact in 1941 Brazil’s pragmatic equidistance: hedging and the Second World War Mediated public diplomacy and securitisation theory: the US campaign against Chinese 5G in Brazil and Chile Domestic terrorism, incumbency, and legislative vote shares The customer is always right? Flags of convenience and the assembling of maritime affairs
×
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