{"title":"GeirLundestad.\u0000 The World’s Most Prestigious Prize: The Inside Story of the Nobel Peace Prize\u0000 . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.","authors":"P. Dungen","doi":"10.1111/PECH.12455","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/PECH.12455","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84790446","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 : 2021-02-23DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2021.1887841
M. Sarvananthan
Piece of War: Narratives of Resilience and Hope by Meha Dixit is an important addition to the mushrooming literature on the impact of civil wars on civilians around the globe. The author discusses ...
梅哈·迪克西特（Meha Dixit）的《战争片段：韧性与希望的叙述》（Piece of War:Narratings of Resilience and Hope）是关于内战对全球平民影响的文献的重要补充。作者讨论了。。。
{"title":"Piece of war: narratives of resilience and hope","authors":"M. Sarvananthan","doi":"10.1080/14781158.2021.1887841","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2021.1887841","url":null,"abstract":"Piece of War: Narratives of Resilience and Hope by Meha Dixit is an important addition to the mushrooming literature on the impact of civil wars on civilians around the globe. The author discusses ...","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14781158.2021.1887841","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42191781","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 : 2021-02-01DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2021.1874899
Arundhati Som
{"title":"How is terrorism changing us? Threat perception and political attitudes in the age of terror","authors":"Arundhati Som","doi":"10.1080/14781158.2021.1874899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2021.1874899","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14781158.2021.1874899","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49071518","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 : 2021-01-20DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2021.1874900
P. Paudel
The edited volume, Conflict and cooperation in the Indo-Pacific, by two prominent international security experts, Ash Rossiter and Brendon J. Cannon, engages with the nature of strategic partnershi...
{"title":"Conflict and cooperation in the Indo-Pacific: new geopolitical realities","authors":"P. Paudel","doi":"10.1080/14781158.2021.1874900","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2021.1874900","url":null,"abstract":"The edited volume, Conflict and cooperation in the Indo-Pacific, by two prominent international security experts, Ash Rossiter and Brendon J. Cannon, engages with the nature of strategic partnershi...","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14781158.2021.1874900","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47300183","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2021.1877650
F. Donelli, Ariel Gonzalez-Levaggi
ABSTRACT This paper aims to analyse the growing enlargement of the spheres of competition from the Middle East into the Horn of Africa. It does so by using insights from regional order and realist neoclassical literature to understand the expansion of regional powers into this area as the result of strategic interactions within their own region. The central argument is that the clashing interests among Middle Eastern regional powers and power asymmetry with Horn of Africa countries are driving an increased security interdependence between the two Red Sea shores. This increasing security engagement by competing Middle Eastern states is producing an insecurity spillover which threatens to exacerbate regional instability in the Horn. It also presents a new role for Middle Eastern regional powers as security providers, particularly in the case of the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Turkey. To substantiate this argument, the paper analyses interregional security dynamics by focusing on three empirical cases in the 2015–2020 period: The Gulf Cooperation Council’s crisis, the establishment of a Turkish military bases in the Horn of Africa and Israel’s new diplomatic engagement in Eastern Africa.
{"title":"Crossing Roads: The Middle East’s Security Engagement in the Horn of Africa","authors":"F. Donelli, Ariel Gonzalez-Levaggi","doi":"10.1080/14781158.2021.1877650","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2021.1877650","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper aims to analyse the growing enlargement of the spheres of competition from the Middle East into the Horn of Africa. It does so by using insights from regional order and realist neoclassical literature to understand the expansion of regional powers into this area as the result of strategic interactions within their own region. The central argument is that the clashing interests among Middle Eastern regional powers and power asymmetry with Horn of Africa countries are driving an increased security interdependence between the two Red Sea shores. This increasing security engagement by competing Middle Eastern states is producing an insecurity spillover which threatens to exacerbate regional instability in the Horn. It also presents a new role for Middle Eastern regional powers as security providers, particularly in the case of the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Turkey. To substantiate this argument, the paper analyses interregional security dynamics by focusing on three empirical cases in the 2015–2020 period: The Gulf Cooperation Council’s crisis, the establishment of a Turkish military bases in the Horn of Africa and Israel’s new diplomatic engagement in Eastern Africa.","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14781158.2021.1877650","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46527319","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2021.1876015
Rita Floyd
ABSTRACT How do western states respond to real or perceived security threats? Do they tend to respond to the same threat in haphazard ways, or does their response follow similar patterns? By analysing the response to a number of diverse contemporary threats – the Crimean crisis, North Korea's nuclear proliferation, climate change and the 2014–2016 Ebola epidemic – this article shows that the security responses by different western states to the same threat tend to be consistent across states, while they also tend to follow a seemingly self-evident pattern of behaviour. In light of these findings, the article suggests that the joint pursuit of security (for short: security cooperation) has replaced war as a primary institution at the western core of sub-global international society. In order to make this argument this article develops a new approach to analysing primary institutions: the practice-based method. While this method is inspired by Peter Wilson and Kilian Spandler's idea that practitioners’ behaviour and rhetoric matters to institutional status, it draws analytical purchase also from Emanuel Adler and Vincent Pouliot's influential practice-based theory to International Relations.
{"title":"Security cooperation as a primary institution of western international society","authors":"Rita Floyd","doi":"10.1080/14781158.2021.1876015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2021.1876015","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How do western states respond to real or perceived security threats? Do they tend to respond to the same threat in haphazard ways, or does their response follow similar patterns? By analysing the response to a number of diverse contemporary threats – the Crimean crisis, North Korea's nuclear proliferation, climate change and the 2014–2016 Ebola epidemic – this article shows that the security responses by different western states to the same threat tend to be consistent across states, while they also tend to follow a seemingly self-evident pattern of behaviour. In light of these findings, the article suggests that the joint pursuit of security (for short: security cooperation) has replaced war as a primary institution at the western core of sub-global international society. In order to make this argument this article develops a new approach to analysing primary institutions: the practice-based method. While this method is inspired by Peter Wilson and Kilian Spandler's idea that practitioners’ behaviour and rhetoric matters to institutional status, it draws analytical purchase also from Emanuel Adler and Vincent Pouliot's influential practice-based theory to International Relations.","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14781158.2021.1876015","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47080325","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2021.1880384
Bantayehu Shiferaw Chanie
ABSTRACT South Sudan became a juridical state in July 2011. Its statehood materialised after protracted north-south civil wars were brought to an end by the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). The CPA set forth self-rule for an interim period and a referendum on independence for the South Sudanese in January 2011. While the two states split peacefully, post-separation relations between the Sudans has been complicated. This paper explores the unamicable political divorce of South Sudan from Sudan. It examines the key post-separation issues that have remained sources of contention and conflict between the Sudans. Based on a qualitative approach, and primary and secondary sources of data, the paper argues that border claims over Abyei and Heglig/Panthou, the politics of oil, mutual subversion, historical grievances, and internal political dynamics continue to drag the two countries into conflict. It argues that because of their importance to the socio-economic and political vitality to both states, border claims and oil remain particularly important in shaping relations between the Sudans. Unless managed properly, based on a win-win approach, the divergence on outstanding issues will exacerbate state building challenges in the world’s newest state of South Sudan.
{"title":"Sudan and South Sudan: an unamicable political divorce","authors":"Bantayehu Shiferaw Chanie","doi":"10.1080/14781158.2021.1880384","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2021.1880384","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT South Sudan became a juridical state in July 2011. Its statehood materialised after protracted north-south civil wars were brought to an end by the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). The CPA set forth self-rule for an interim period and a referendum on independence for the South Sudanese in January 2011. While the two states split peacefully, post-separation relations between the Sudans has been complicated. This paper explores the unamicable political divorce of South Sudan from Sudan. It examines the key post-separation issues that have remained sources of contention and conflict between the Sudans. Based on a qualitative approach, and primary and secondary sources of data, the paper argues that border claims over Abyei and Heglig/Panthou, the politics of oil, mutual subversion, historical grievances, and internal political dynamics continue to drag the two countries into conflict. It argues that because of their importance to the socio-economic and political vitality to both states, border claims and oil remain particularly important in shaping relations between the Sudans. Unless managed properly, based on a win-win approach, the divergence on outstanding issues will exacerbate state building challenges in the world’s newest state of South Sudan.","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14781158.2021.1880384","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46633425","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}
{"title":"Pathways and Barriers for Women’s Mobilization during Civil War: Nepal, Colombia, and Rwanda in Comparative Perspective","authors":"Margo G. Evilsizor, Fletcher D. Cox","doi":"10.1111/pech.12449","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pech.12449","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88053403","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}
{"title":"Diagnosing the Nation: Scientists, Mothers, and Physicians Confront Nuclear Testing and Civil Defense Through Medical Activism, 1958–1963","authors":"J. Whitehurst","doi":"10.1111/PECH.12450","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/PECH.12450","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73278373","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 : 2020-12-28DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2021.1867526
Kelly A. McHugh
ABSTRACT In this article, I focus on a subset of Obama’s foreign policy views, namely his beliefs about the appropriate circumstances under which the United States should engage in armed conflict. I argue that the Iraq war served as a formative event in the development of Obama’s worldview. He derived distinct lessons from this policy failure, leading him to articulate a restrictive set of conditions that should be met before the United States considered intervening in the internal politics of another nation, absent a direct threat to national security. I undertake a detailed examination of two case studies – the administration’s debates leading to the 2011 intervention in Libya and the decision not to intervene in Syria in 2013 – and demonstrate how the lessons of Iraq shaped Obama’s policy choices at critical junctures in the deliberations.
{"title":"No more Iraqs: analysing use of force decisions during the Obama administration","authors":"Kelly A. McHugh","doi":"10.1080/14781158.2021.1867526","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2021.1867526","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this article, I focus on a subset of Obama’s foreign policy views, namely his beliefs about the appropriate circumstances under which the United States should engage in armed conflict. I argue that the Iraq war served as a formative event in the development of Obama’s worldview. He derived distinct lessons from this policy failure, leading him to articulate a restrictive set of conditions that should be met before the United States considered intervening in the internal politics of another nation, absent a direct threat to national security. I undertake a detailed examination of two case studies – the administration’s debates leading to the 2011 intervention in Libya and the decision not to intervene in Syria in 2013 – and demonstrate how the lessons of Iraq shaped Obama’s policy choices at critical junctures in the deliberations.","PeriodicalId":44867,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Peace & Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2020-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14781158.2021.1867526","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41924140","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：