Pub Date : 2023-03-08DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2023.2188199
D. K. Banini
ABSTRACT West Africa’s Moratorium on Importation, Exportation, and Manufacture of Light Weapons was adopted in 1998, and the Convention on Small Arms and Light Weapons, their Ammunition, and Other Related Materials was adopted in 2006. The Moratorium and the Convention are more than two decades old, respectively. However, there is little knowledge of their effectiveness in reducing arms flow. This research evaluates how ECOWAS members implemented the Moratorium and Convention to determine compliance trends. It uses a theoretical framework of domestic political legitimacy as a crucial mechanism to explain compliance variations. Political legitimacy is imperative for states’ and domestic groups’ behavior, and its dearth can lead to obtaining arms illegally, which the Moratorium and Convention seek to prevent. The empirics use case studies about Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire to infer how political legitimacy variations influence compliance with the agreement.
{"title":"Securitizing small arms and light weapons in support of regional security: perspective from West Africa","authors":"D. K. Banini","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2023.2188199","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2023.2188199","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT West Africa’s Moratorium on Importation, Exportation, and Manufacture of Light Weapons was adopted in 1998, and the Convention on Small Arms and Light Weapons, their Ammunition, and Other Related Materials was adopted in 2006. The Moratorium and the Convention are more than two decades old, respectively. However, there is little knowledge of their effectiveness in reducing arms flow. This research evaluates how ECOWAS members implemented the Moratorium and Convention to determine compliance trends. It uses a theoretical framework of domestic political legitimacy as a crucial mechanism to explain compliance variations. Political legitimacy is imperative for states’ and domestic groups’ behavior, and its dearth can lead to obtaining arms illegally, which the Moratorium and Convention seek to prevent. The empirics use case studies about Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire to infer how political legitimacy variations influence compliance with the agreement.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"153 - 176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42850402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2023.2165914
L. Sharma
{"title":"No Shortcuts: Why States Struggle to Develop a Military Cyber-Force","authors":"L. Sharma","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2023.2165914","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2023.2165914","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"150 - 152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46797820","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-20DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2159815
Josep Baqués-Quesada
ABSTRACT Tensions between Spain and Morocco rose throughout 2021. However, they stem from decades-long conflicts over territory. One of Rabat’s main claims relates to the Spanish cities of Ceuta and Melilla, located on the north coast of Africa. The present article highlights the main clashes between the two countries and their respective positions. It then explores whether Morocco is operating a Grey Zone strategy to secure control over the two cities in the medium term and concludes that this is indeed the case.
{"title":"Is Morocco operating a grey zone in Ceuta and Melilla?","authors":"Josep Baqués-Quesada","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2159815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2159815","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Tensions between Spain and Morocco rose throughout 2021. However, they stem from decades-long conflicts over territory. One of Rabat’s main claims relates to the Spanish cities of Ceuta and Melilla, located on the north coast of Africa. The present article highlights the main clashes between the two countries and their respective positions. It then explores whether Morocco is operating a Grey Zone strategy to secure control over the two cities in the medium term and concludes that this is indeed the case.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"198 - 214"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43473106","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-26DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2137495
B. Flynn
ABSTRACT This paper examines four of Europe’s more marginal military institutions that receive less attention: the Franco-British Combined Joint Expeditionary Force (CJEF); the French led European Intervention Initiative (EI2); the British led Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF); and the Polish, Lithuanian and Ukrainian joint brigade (LITPOLUKRBRIG). These are described here as “interstitial” because they exist in the niches between both the main multilateral security forums (NATO, EU, UN, OSCE) and the national level. They are intermediaries, working like bridges to cover political obstacles, while often borrowing resources from established actors (notably NATO). It is argued here that such institutions are a form of national hedging against institutional blockages within NATO/EU while providing a platform for national defence policy entrepreneurship. In the context of Cold War 2.0 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, such institutional practices should not be dismissed as marginal. They offer a means to deploy European military forces outside formal NATO or EU decision-making structures, a feature which confers a useful flexibility. (161)
{"title":"Knowing your CJEF from your JEF: Europe’s “Alphabet soup” of interstitial military cooperation-what relevance for cold war 2.0?","authors":"B. Flynn","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2137495","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2137495","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper examines four of Europe’s more marginal military institutions that receive less attention: the Franco-British Combined Joint Expeditionary Force (CJEF); the French led European Intervention Initiative (EI2); the British led Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF); and the Polish, Lithuanian and Ukrainian joint brigade (LITPOLUKRBRIG). These are described here as “interstitial” because they exist in the niches between both the main multilateral security forums (NATO, EU, UN, OSCE) and the national level. They are intermediaries, working like bridges to cover political obstacles, while often borrowing resources from established actors (notably NATO). It is argued here that such institutions are a form of national hedging against institutional blockages within NATO/EU while providing a platform for national defence policy entrepreneurship. In the context of Cold War 2.0 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, such institutional practices should not be dismissed as marginal. They offer a means to deploy European military forces outside formal NATO or EU decision-making structures, a feature which confers a useful flexibility. (161)","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"313 - 333"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43041307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-20DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2137494
A. Howlett, A. Migone, Michael Howlett
ABSTRACT The willingness of defence departments to select the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) for their fifth-generation multirole fighter has frequently been analyzed as stemming from the close historical connections allies such as Japan or Canada have with the United States. However, such an approach glosses over or ignores the operation of military procurement processes which are more idiosyncratic and subject to many pushes and pulls from different actors and directions. This article compares the experiences of Australia and Canada in procuring the JSF. Both countries are British Commonwealth members, with a long history of supporting western, and in particular, US alliances. But while Australia has secured its F-35 procurement and the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) has already received its F-35s, Canada has only recently overcome a lengthy F-35 procurement battle that remains mired in controversy and will not deliver to the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) an aircraft for several years yet. This comparative case study between Australian and Canadian defence priorities offers a new explanation for this disparity of procurement success based on the need to both create and maintain alignment between government strategic defence policy and military service doctrine if major platform purchasing decisions are to survive.
{"title":"The politics of military procurement: the F-35 purchasing process in Canada and Australia Compared","authors":"A. Howlett, A. Migone, Michael Howlett","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2137494","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2137494","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The willingness of defence departments to select the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) for their fifth-generation multirole fighter has frequently been analyzed as stemming from the close historical connections allies such as Japan or Canada have with the United States. However, such an approach glosses over or ignores the operation of military procurement processes which are more idiosyncratic and subject to many pushes and pulls from different actors and directions. This article compares the experiences of Australia and Canada in procuring the JSF. Both countries are British Commonwealth members, with a long history of supporting western, and in particular, US alliances. But while Australia has secured its F-35 procurement and the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) has already received its F-35s, Canada has only recently overcome a lengthy F-35 procurement battle that remains mired in controversy and will not deliver to the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) an aircraft for several years yet. This comparative case study between Australian and Canadian defence priorities offers a new explanation for this disparity of procurement success based on the need to both create and maintain alignment between government strategic defence policy and military service doctrine if major platform purchasing decisions are to survive.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"292 - 312"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44751378","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-20DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2138349
R. Manwaring, Josh Holloway
ABSTRACT Cyber-enabled foreign interference remains a key threat to many advanced industrial countries. In many cases, the security response has been to build “resilience” – cyber, national and, increasingly, democratic resilience – in line with whole-of-government and whole-of-society strategies. However, many of these securitised responses are “top-down” and elite driven. These resilience agendas do not pay sufficient attention to the views, concerns and threat-perceptions of citizens, potentially undermining their efficacy. In this article, we focus on the Australian case to better understand how citizen cyber skills, threat awareness, and perceptions of institutional capacity can inform democratic resilience to evolving cyber and information risks. We find strong evidence of a clear gap between citizen views and the securitised responses of governments in dealing with cyber-enabled foreign interference. A further issue from the Australian case is that citizens are framed as a passive strategic resource, rather than conceived of as a potentially substantive partner in a “joined-up” response.
{"title":"Resilience to cyber-enabled foreign interference: citizen understanding and threat perceptions","authors":"R. Manwaring, Josh Holloway","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2138349","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2138349","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Cyber-enabled foreign interference remains a key threat to many advanced industrial countries. In many cases, the security response has been to build “resilience” – cyber, national and, increasingly, democratic resilience – in line with whole-of-government and whole-of-society strategies. However, many of these securitised responses are “top-down” and elite driven. These resilience agendas do not pay sufficient attention to the views, concerns and threat-perceptions of citizens, potentially undermining their efficacy. In this article, we focus on the Australian case to better understand how citizen cyber skills, threat awareness, and perceptions of institutional capacity can inform democratic resilience to evolving cyber and information risks. We find strong evidence of a clear gap between citizen views and the securitised responses of governments in dealing with cyber-enabled foreign interference. A further issue from the Australian case is that citizens are framed as a passive strategic resource, rather than conceived of as a potentially substantive partner in a “joined-up” response.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"334 - 357"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45097863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-06DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2132232
Johan Nisser
ABSTRACT Doctrines are considered a key component of military power, shaping the ways in which armed forces organize and operate. This study critically examines the assumption that armed forces can change their practices by writing formal doctrine. The study addresses the research problem of why some formal doctrines are implemented and others are rejected. It does so by developing and testing a novel theoretical framework on doctrinal implementation through a comparative case study on rejection of the US Army 1976 Active Defense doctrine and successful implementation of the 1982 AirLand Battle doctrine. The study shows that contrary to popular beliefs, the actual concepts within a formal doctrine do not seem crucial for whether it is implemented or rejected. Rather, cultural coherence and inclusive creation seem crucial in this regard.
{"title":"Conceptualizing doctrinal rejection: a comparison between Active Defense and Airland Battle","authors":"Johan Nisser","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2132232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2132232","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Doctrines are considered a key component of military power, shaping the ways in which armed forces organize and operate. This study critically examines the assumption that armed forces can change their practices by writing formal doctrine. The study addresses the research problem of why some formal doctrines are implemented and others are rejected. It does so by developing and testing a novel theoretical framework on doctrinal implementation through a comparative case study on rejection of the US Army 1976 Active Defense doctrine and successful implementation of the 1982 AirLand Battle doctrine. The study shows that contrary to popular beliefs, the actual concepts within a formal doctrine do not seem crucial for whether it is implemented or rejected. Rather, cultural coherence and inclusive creation seem crucial in this regard.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"274 - 291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43174470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-25DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2110474
Delphine Deschaux-Dutard
ABSTRACT European strategic autonomy has become a common motto since the EU’s Global Security Strategy (2016). France and Germany have for several years been playing a leading role in promoting the concept even though they share quite different views on what such autonomy should aim for, especially in a context of multipolarity and power re-configurations. This article analyzes the role of French-German input in European strategic autonomy relying on two criteria: input legitimacy (procedures) and output legitimacy (efficiency). Based on three concrete examples (the MPCC, PESCO, and the European Strategic Compact), the article explores the French-German input in developing European autonomous military tools and capabilities and seeks to explain the legitimacy of this input based on factors such as the historical legacy of French-German military cooperation and the use of political symbolism. Then the article focuses on the question of the efficiency (output) of this bilateral input in European strategic autonomy. The main advantage of this approach is its explanatory power to capture the hiatus between the strong output legitimacy that Paris and Berlin bring into European strategic autonomy and its rather limited empirical output produced. This hiatus can be explained by strategic cultural divergences between Paris and Berlin.
{"title":"European defence in an interpolar context: explaining the limitations of French-German contribution to European strategic autonomy","authors":"Delphine Deschaux-Dutard","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2110474","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2110474","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT European strategic autonomy has become a common motto since the EU’s Global Security Strategy (2016). France and Germany have for several years been playing a leading role in promoting the concept even though they share quite different views on what such autonomy should aim for, especially in a context of multipolarity and power re-configurations. This article analyzes the role of French-German input in European strategic autonomy relying on two criteria: input legitimacy (procedures) and output legitimacy (efficiency). Based on three concrete examples (the MPCC, PESCO, and the European Strategic Compact), the article explores the French-German input in developing European autonomous military tools and capabilities and seeks to explain the legitimacy of this input based on factors such as the historical legacy of French-German military cooperation and the use of political symbolism. Then the article focuses on the question of the efficiency (output) of this bilateral input in European strategic autonomy. The main advantage of this approach is its explanatory power to capture the hiatus between the strong output legitimacy that Paris and Berlin bring into European strategic autonomy and its rather limited empirical output produced. This hiatus can be explained by strategic cultural divergences between Paris and Berlin.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"591 - 608"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49569716","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-25DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2110484
Cornelia-Adriana Baciu, Klaus Kotzé
ABSTRACT An increasing strand of literature has been studying the dynamics of contestation of the liberal order. Holding that order emergence commences with rhetoric and narratives, this article takes stock of the BRICS summit diplomacy and contestation practices. It pursues a two-level argument. Applying BRICS as a historical case study, the article first reveals how BRICS engages in mimetic performances, re-producing parts of the global order, while simultaneously seeking a re-configuration of the current international system. Second, our analysis shows that through thin and aspiring thick recognition, BRICS countries move toward an enhanced role and status, striving for a better position in the global order. Empirically, to unpack our argument, we analyze BRICS summit diplomacy and rhetoric by unfolding the outcome declarations in the period 2009–2020, as well as BRICS performative practices.
{"title":"Mimesis and status-seeking in the global order. BRICS summit diplomacy and performative practices","authors":"Cornelia-Adriana Baciu, Klaus Kotzé","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2110484","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2110484","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT An increasing strand of literature has been studying the dynamics of contestation of the liberal order. Holding that order emergence commences with rhetoric and narratives, this article takes stock of the BRICS summit diplomacy and contestation practices. It pursues a two-level argument. Applying BRICS as a historical case study, the article first reveals how BRICS engages in mimetic performances, re-producing parts of the global order, while simultaneously seeking a re-configuration of the current international system. Second, our analysis shows that through thin and aspiring thick recognition, BRICS countries move toward an enhanced role and status, striving for a better position in the global order. Empirically, to unpack our argument, we analyze BRICS summit diplomacy and rhetoric by unfolding the outcome declarations in the period 2009–2020, as well as BRICS performative practices.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"709 - 735"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41574414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-25DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2110482
Cornelia-Adriana Baciu
ABSTRACT This Introduction to Special Issue (SI) seeks to provide a corrective dimension to unipolar and multipolar understandings of global order by proposing to integrate several levels of analysis. It seeks to introduce a different understanding of the contemporary world order. To this end, it first develops a new theoretical model of world order, putting forward the concept of interpolarity. Interpolarity is understood as the interaction between multiple interdependent poles of different sizes. The main utility of this concept is that it can provide a theoretical foundation for integrating means, ways, and ends in a more stable manner. Second, this Introduction to SI estimates three main conceptual building blocks of an interpolar world order: positive power, citizen reciprocity, and elite bridging. The contributions in this Special Issue examine different aspects of the European security and foreign policy as part of the liberal international order – including the relations with NATO and the US –, EU actorness in cybersecurity governance, French-German cooperation, role conceptions and differentiated integration, as well as the BRICS perspective on world order.
{"title":"Interpolarity. Re-visiting security and the global order","authors":"Cornelia-Adriana Baciu","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2110482","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2110482","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This Introduction to Special Issue (SI) seeks to provide a corrective dimension to unipolar and multipolar understandings of global order by proposing to integrate several levels of analysis. It seeks to introduce a different understanding of the contemporary world order. To this end, it first develops a new theoretical model of world order, putting forward the concept of interpolarity. Interpolarity is understood as the interaction between multiple interdependent poles of different sizes. The main utility of this concept is that it can provide a theoretical foundation for integrating means, ways, and ends in a more stable manner. Second, this Introduction to SI estimates three main conceptual building blocks of an interpolar world order: positive power, citizen reciprocity, and elite bridging. The contributions in this Special Issue examine different aspects of the European security and foreign policy as part of the liberal international order – including the relations with NATO and the US –, EU actorness in cybersecurity governance, French-German cooperation, role conceptions and differentiated integration, as well as the BRICS perspective on world order.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"571 - 590"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43015464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：