This paper introduces new data on the creation of subsidiary bodies (SBs) by members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) between 1972 and 2020. Delegation to SBs is one of the principal means through which the UNSC acts, and these bodies are designed to carry out crucial functions such as peacekeeping, implementing sanctions, and investigating crises. Yet, no research has systematically evaluated their creation, design, and use. Our dataset includes a typology of all proposed and created SBs as well as information about their purpose and design. After introducing the data, we empirically analyze the determinants of SB creation. Multivariate regression demonstrates that SBs are more likely to be created when the preferences of the permanent members are aligned. Moreover, stronger bodies are more likely to be created during periods of high preference alignment, while middle- and lower-strength bodies are less influenced by member alignment. These results provide unique evidence demonstrating how politics affects the choice of when and how the UNSC responds to global problems. Our data and analysis paint a picture of a more proactive UNSC than is commonly portrayed in the literature, and these data will enable scholars to further analyze UNSC action.
{"title":"The Politics of International Peace and Security: Introducing a New Dataset on the Creation of United Nations Security Council Subsidiary Bodies","authors":"Andrew Lugg, Sloan Lansdale, Shannon Carcelli","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae060","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae060","url":null,"abstract":"This paper introduces new data on the creation of subsidiary bodies (SBs) by members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) between 1972 and 2020. Delegation to SBs is one of the principal means through which the UNSC acts, and these bodies are designed to carry out crucial functions such as peacekeeping, implementing sanctions, and investigating crises. Yet, no research has systematically evaluated their creation, design, and use. Our dataset includes a typology of all proposed and created SBs as well as information about their purpose and design. After introducing the data, we empirically analyze the determinants of SB creation. Multivariate regression demonstrates that SBs are more likely to be created when the preferences of the permanent members are aligned. Moreover, stronger bodies are more likely to be created during periods of high preference alignment, while middle- and lower-strength bodies are less influenced by member alignment. These results provide unique evidence demonstrating how politics affects the choice of when and how the UNSC responds to global problems. Our data and analysis paint a picture of a more proactive UNSC than is commonly portrayed in the literature, and these data will enable scholars to further analyze UNSC action.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140603871","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
How is the space for contemporary interventions constructed? This article deepens our understanding of counterterrorism as a dialectical form of intervention by highlighting the importance of unifying rationalities in the creation of “ungoverned spaces” as abstract spaces for intervention purposes. We combine dialectical and decolonial thinking to track how unifying rationalities in Nigeria and Libya are deployed across cognitive, normative, and operational constructs. The article examines how interventions are cognitively tied to coloniality of knowing, being, and power, which exploit identity, religion, or societal divisions to justify ungovernance and normalize state and foreign violence. The simultaneous and reciprocal globalization of local security concerns and localization of global security predicaments facilitates the formation of abstract spaces for counterterrorism purposes. Empirically, our analysis shows how portraying Libya and Nigeria as ungoverned creates a void of meaning, putting external actors in charge of restoring governance and protecting human security, modernity, and civility. Interveners in Libya contributed to normalizing a broader spectrum of violence, frequently internalized by competing actors through their normative tropes. In Nigeria, state and foreign interventionism and counterinsurgency have been responsible for the widespread use of violence against entire communities.
{"title":"Abstract Spaces for Intervention in Libya and Nigeria","authors":"Debora V Malito, Muhammad Dan Suleiman","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae052","url":null,"abstract":"How is the space for contemporary interventions constructed? This article deepens our understanding of counterterrorism as a dialectical form of intervention by highlighting the importance of unifying rationalities in the creation of “ungoverned spaces” as abstract spaces for intervention purposes. We combine dialectical and decolonial thinking to track how unifying rationalities in Nigeria and Libya are deployed across cognitive, normative, and operational constructs. The article examines how interventions are cognitively tied to coloniality of knowing, being, and power, which exploit identity, religion, or societal divisions to justify ungovernance and normalize state and foreign violence. The simultaneous and reciprocal globalization of local security concerns and localization of global security predicaments facilitates the formation of abstract spaces for counterterrorism purposes. Empirically, our analysis shows how portraying Libya and Nigeria as ungoverned creates a void of meaning, putting external actors in charge of restoring governance and protecting human security, modernity, and civility. Interveners in Libya contributed to normalizing a broader spectrum of violence, frequently internalized by competing actors through their normative tropes. In Nigeria, state and foreign interventionism and counterinsurgency have been responsible for the widespread use of violence against entire communities.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140603687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Can prosecutions by US authorities help spread enforcement of foreign bribery laws to other countries? In this article, we explore this question by re-examining earlier scholarship that found that US prosecutions of foreign corporations under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) increase the likelihood that the corporation's home state will enforce its own foreign bribery laws. Using a conditional-frailty Cox model that allows us to model foreign bribery enforcement actions as repeat-events, we do not find evidence that FCPA prosecutions lead to sustained increases of foreign bribery enforcement by target countries. We also find that prior results are not robust to the inclusion of an important confounding variable: a country's level of exposure to corruption in their trading partners. Still, while our findings indicate a more limited role of US law enforcement in this area, we nonetheless see many promising avenues for future research on transnational law enforcement and its consequences.
{"title":"Transnational Legal Spillover? A Re-Appraisal of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention","authors":"Elizabeth Acorn, Michael O Allen","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae071","url":null,"abstract":"Can prosecutions by US authorities help spread enforcement of foreign bribery laws to other countries? In this article, we explore this question by re-examining earlier scholarship that found that US prosecutions of foreign corporations under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) increase the likelihood that the corporation's home state will enforce its own foreign bribery laws. Using a conditional-frailty Cox model that allows us to model foreign bribery enforcement actions as repeat-events, we do not find evidence that FCPA prosecutions lead to sustained increases of foreign bribery enforcement by target countries. We also find that prior results are not robust to the inclusion of an important confounding variable: a country's level of exposure to corruption in their trading partners. Still, while our findings indicate a more limited role of US law enforcement in this area, we nonetheless see many promising avenues for future research on transnational law enforcement and its consequences.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"79 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140603789","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
s Since the mid-2000s, state-building in Somaliland has emerged as a complex mixture of coexisting, competing programs, political aspirations, and foreign agendas. This article applies a dialectical approach to focus on the scalar relations among actors and models of capacity-building, from programs’ design to their implementation. Drawing on science and technology studies, I use the term “complexities” to describe the “multiplicities” of programs, actors, and different ways of ordering that coexist and overlap, sometimes in tension among them, other times in coordination. Specifically, this article examines two approaches to state-building in Somaliland: the United Nations Development Program’s institution-building and US Agency for International Development (USAID)-funded stabilization programs. Going beyond fixed binaries, such as international and local, homogenous and hybrid, state-building and state-formation, this article observes how these dichotomies are formed and how, rather than being separate, they combine together, generating techno-political arrangements. Somaliland’s complexity is made up of techno-political arrangements that are coproduced by both technical expertise and national political aspirations. Technical capacity-building programs, such as the redesign of the Somalia Institutional Development Project (SIDP), the creation of Somaliland’s National Development Plan (NDP), and the allocation of USAID’s grants, have become the terrain for political claims over the redistribution of resources and the control of state institutions.
s 自 2000 年代中期以来，索马里兰的国家建设一直是各种并存、相互竞争的计划、政治愿望和外国议程的复杂混合体。本文运用辩证的方法，重点探讨了从项目设计到项目实施过程中各参与方和能力建设模式之间的标度关系。借鉴科技研究，我用 "复杂性 "一词来描述项目、参与者和不同排序方式的 "多重性"，它们共存并相互重叠，有时相互紧张，有时相互协调。具体而言，本文研究了索马里兰国家建设的两种方法：联合国开发计划署的机构建设项目和美国国际开发署（USAID）资助的稳定项目。本文超越了国际与地方、同质与混合、国家建设与国家形成等固定的二元对立，观察了这些二元对立是如何形成的，以及它们是如何结合在一起而非分离，从而产生技术政治安排的。索马里兰的复杂性是由技术专长和国家政治愿望共同促成的技术政治安排所构成的。技术能力建设项目，如索马里机构发展项目（SIDP）的重新设计、索马里兰国家发展计划（NDP）的制定以及美国国际开发署（USAID）赠款的分配，已成为资源再分配和国家机构控制权政治诉求的场所。
{"title":"Complexities of State-Building in Somaliland","authors":"Monica Fagioli","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae053","url":null,"abstract":"s Since the mid-2000s, state-building in Somaliland has emerged as a complex mixture of coexisting, competing programs, political aspirations, and foreign agendas. This article applies a dialectical approach to focus on the scalar relations among actors and models of capacity-building, from programs’ design to their implementation. Drawing on science and technology studies, I use the term “complexities” to describe the “multiplicities” of programs, actors, and different ways of ordering that coexist and overlap, sometimes in tension among them, other times in coordination. Specifically, this article examines two approaches to state-building in Somaliland: the United Nations Development Program’s institution-building and US Agency for International Development (USAID)-funded stabilization programs. Going beyond fixed binaries, such as international and local, homogenous and hybrid, state-building and state-formation, this article observes how these dichotomies are formed and how, rather than being separate, they combine together, generating techno-political arrangements. Somaliland’s complexity is made up of techno-political arrangements that are coproduced by both technical expertise and national political aspirations. Technical capacity-building programs, such as the redesign of the Somalia Institutional Development Project (SIDP), the creation of Somaliland’s National Development Plan (NDP), and the allocation of USAID’s grants, have become the terrain for political claims over the redistribution of resources and the control of state institutions.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140551998","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What happens after border externalization? States and regional organizations of the Global North increasingly engage in transnational migration management that seeks to prevent potential irregular migration beyond their territory. Despite the impressive financial and political resources the involved actors mobilize to reach this goal, little is known about the effects of this strategy on their target states and populations. This paper conceptualizes border externalization as a spatial intervention that absorbs contingent migrant flows into an interplay of capital and race. It argues that the immobilization and differential integration produced through externalization can serve as a spatial fix for labor shortages in transit “migration” states. This differential integration disempowers the targeted migrant population and aggravates racial antagonisms. Hence, border externalization is not just a (by-)product of racist ideology and policy, but also intensifies racial hierarchies in the space it intervenes into. The paper studies this through the case of the “EU-Turkey Deal” and Turkey’s Syrian refugee population, building on document analysis and primary interview data with industry representatives, farmers, NGO workers, and government officials. On a theoretical level, the paper thereby contributes to the recent trend that reinserts the border into global processes of racialized capital accumulation.
{"title":"The Transit Fix—Border Externalization and the Interplay of Capital and Race in the Transit “Migration” State","authors":"Timor Landherr","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae068","url":null,"abstract":"What happens after border externalization? States and regional organizations of the Global North increasingly engage in transnational migration management that seeks to prevent potential irregular migration beyond their territory. Despite the impressive financial and political resources the involved actors mobilize to reach this goal, little is known about the effects of this strategy on their target states and populations. This paper conceptualizes border externalization as a spatial intervention that absorbs contingent migrant flows into an interplay of capital and race. It argues that the immobilization and differential integration produced through externalization can serve as a spatial fix for labor shortages in transit “migration” states. This differential integration disempowers the targeted migrant population and aggravates racial antagonisms. Hence, border externalization is not just a (by-)product of racist ideology and policy, but also intensifies racial hierarchies in the space it intervenes into. The paper studies this through the case of the “EU-Turkey Deal” and Turkey’s Syrian refugee population, building on document analysis and primary interview data with industry representatives, farmers, NGO workers, and government officials. On a theoretical level, the paper thereby contributes to the recent trend that reinserts the border into global processes of racialized capital accumulation.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140552004","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Luis L Schenoni, Gary Goertz, Andrew P Owsiak, Paul F Diehl
s After the Napoleonic Wars interstate war regularly occurred throughout the Western Hemisphere—until in matter of decades it disappeared. After the 1930s even low-level militarized interstate conflict became less frequent, shorter, and less severe over time. What explains the change in this specific region and historical jucture? We argue that leaders in the Americas identified territorial disputes and foreign intervention as interrelated problems that frequently caused the interstate war. In response, they developed a unique regional norm-complex that bundled together the norms of territorial integrity and non-intervention with the principle of peaceful conflict resolution. This norm complex emerged via Latin American entrepreneurship shortly after independence, cascaded with Pan-Americanism, and crystallized around the signature of the Saavedra Lamas Treaty in the early 1930s. We explain how, why, and when norm complexes develop. We then investigate the evolution and effects of the Latin American norm complex via statistics and within-case counterfactuals. We conclude that interstate war disappeared from the Americas with the acceptance and codification of this norm-complex.
{"title":"The Saavedra Lamas Peace: How a Norm Complex Evolved and Crystallized to Eliminate War in the Americas","authors":"Luis L Schenoni, Gary Goertz, Andrew P Owsiak, Paul F Diehl","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae047","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae047","url":null,"abstract":"s After the Napoleonic Wars interstate war regularly occurred throughout the Western Hemisphere—until in matter of decades it disappeared. After the 1930s even low-level militarized interstate conflict became less frequent, shorter, and less severe over time. What explains the change in this specific region and historical jucture? We argue that leaders in the Americas identified territorial disputes and foreign intervention as interrelated problems that frequently caused the interstate war. In response, they developed a unique regional norm-complex that bundled together the norms of territorial integrity and non-intervention with the principle of peaceful conflict resolution. This norm complex emerged via Latin American entrepreneurship shortly after independence, cascaded with Pan-Americanism, and crystallized around the signature of the Saavedra Lamas Treaty in the early 1930s. We explain how, why, and when norm complexes develop. We then investigate the evolution and effects of the Latin American norm complex via statistics and within-case counterfactuals. We conclude that interstate war disappeared from the Americas with the acceptance and codification of this norm-complex.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140545533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
European Union (EU) diplomatic representation in third countries is performed by both the Member States and by the EU Delegation. This hybrid system of representation functions through EU coordination. As social media have become important channels of state representation, coordination also takes place in the domain of digital diplomacy. This article analyzes how the EU Member State embassies and the EU Delegation coordinate EU representation through online and offline interactions. It investigates the practices of coordination and maps routines of digital sociability. The United States’ capital Washington, DC provides a context of both strong bilateral relations and a history of shared EU interests. The study draws on observations on Twitter (later renamed X) between 2019 and 2021 and reflections from diplomats who engage in the coordination of EU representation, collected through an online survey and interviews. By examining the reciprocity between online and offline interactions, the study illuminates how relationships are cultivated, a sense of collective belonging is fostered, and social order is negotiated. The findings enhance our understanding of how digital diplomacy is deeply embedded within diplomatic contexts and their distinctive practices. They contribute to advancing knowledge about the interplay of digital diplomacy, multilateral representation, and the dynamics that shape diplomatic engagements.
{"title":"Diplomatic Representation and Online/Offline Interactions: EU Coordination and Digital Sociability","authors":"Elsa Hedling","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae022","url":null,"abstract":"European Union (EU) diplomatic representation in third countries is performed by both the Member States and by the EU Delegation. This hybrid system of representation functions through EU coordination. As social media have become important channels of state representation, coordination also takes place in the domain of digital diplomacy. This article analyzes how the EU Member State embassies and the EU Delegation coordinate EU representation through online and offline interactions. It investigates the practices of coordination and maps routines of digital sociability. The United States’ capital Washington, DC provides a context of both strong bilateral relations and a history of shared EU interests. The study draws on observations on Twitter (later renamed X) between 2019 and 2021 and reflections from diplomats who engage in the coordination of EU representation, collected through an online survey and interviews. By examining the reciprocity between online and offline interactions, the study illuminates how relationships are cultivated, a sense of collective belonging is fostered, and social order is negotiated. The findings enhance our understanding of how digital diplomacy is deeply embedded within diplomatic contexts and their distinctive practices. They contribute to advancing knowledge about the interplay of digital diplomacy, multilateral representation, and the dynamics that shape diplomatic engagements.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140542098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
s Declaration of positionality and the confession of privilege as a way of revealing unequal power dynamics in knowledge production has become an increasingly encouraged reflexive practice in international relations and other disciplines. However, we interrogate the potentially negative implications of this methodology, occurring through a reification of material, assumed, and imagined hierarchies between people, which then is advertised and (re)produced by its utterance. We further query the modernist origins of reflexive methodology, which has inspired the practice of declaring positionality, and argue that its underpinning coloniality has bearings for its use today. We then explore how this coloniality manifests: Thus, first, we consider the extent to which publicly acknowledging privilege paradoxically acts as a means of centering whiteness through the narcissistic gaze and an assertion of legitimacy. Second, we argue positionality statements offer a redemption of guilt for the hegemonic researcher. And lastly, rather than ameliorating unequal power dynamics in the production of knowledge, we contend positionality statements may constitute hidden power moves in which one is able to signal and reinstate one’s authority vis-à-vis people, but especially women, of color. We end with a call for a reparative scholarship that acknowledges these limitations in positionality statements.
{"title":"Positionality Statements as a Function of Coloniality: Interrogating Reflexive Methodologies","authors":"Jasmine K Gani, Rabea M Khan","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae038","url":null,"abstract":"s Declaration of positionality and the confession of privilege as a way of revealing unequal power dynamics in knowledge production has become an increasingly encouraged reflexive practice in international relations and other disciplines. However, we interrogate the potentially negative implications of this methodology, occurring through a reification of material, assumed, and imagined hierarchies between people, which then is advertised and (re)produced by its utterance. We further query the modernist origins of reflexive methodology, which has inspired the practice of declaring positionality, and argue that its underpinning coloniality has bearings for its use today. We then explore how this coloniality manifests: Thus, first, we consider the extent to which publicly acknowledging privilege paradoxically acts as a means of centering whiteness through the narcissistic gaze and an assertion of legitimacy. Second, we argue positionality statements offer a redemption of guilt for the hegemonic researcher. And lastly, rather than ameliorating unequal power dynamics in the production of knowledge, we contend positionality statements may constitute hidden power moves in which one is able to signal and reinstate one’s authority vis-à-vis people, but especially women, of color. We end with a call for a reparative scholarship that acknowledges these limitations in positionality statements.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140542163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
s Through a close textual analysis of US diplomatic cables and other relevant documents, this article provides new empirical data to trace the mutual construction of Mali as a site of terrorist threat. It argues that this mutual construction paradoxically enhanced the agency of Malian foreign policy elites in negotiations with their US interlocutors and highlights the effectiveness of Malian deployment of this discourse to shape the terms upon which intervention took place in the 2002–2012 period. It shifts the focus of the analysis of intervention in Mali both in space and in time through centering the US–Mali relationship pre-2012, displacing the dominant post-2013 France–Mali frame. This opens up a new dialectical and interimperial perspective on the agency of the Malian foreign policy elite in shaping the terms upon which intervention took place. This demonstrates the need for both a wider lens and a longer historical scope on investigations of intervention, particularly relevant as this discourse of terrorist threat has since 2013 spread beyond Mali to the wider Sahel region.
s 本文通过对美国外交电报和其他相关文件进行严密的文本分析，提供了新的实证数据，以追溯马里作为恐怖主义威胁之地的相互建构过程。文章认为，这种相互建构自相矛盾地增强了马里外交政策精英在与美国对话者谈判时的能动性，并强调了马里在 2002-2012 年期间利用这种话语来塑造干预条件的有效性。通过以 2012 年前美国与马里的关系为中心，取代 2013 年后法国与马里的主导框架，该报告在空间和时间上转移了马里干预分析的重点。这开辟了一个新的辩证和临时帝国视角，以审视马里外交政策精英在塑造干预条件方面的作用。这表明，对干预的调查需要更广阔的视角和更长远的历史范围，尤其是自 2013 年以来，恐怖主义威胁的论述已从马里蔓延到更广泛的萨赫勒地区。
{"title":"The Construction of Terrorist Threat in Mali: Agency and Narratives of Intervention","authors":"Joe Gazeley","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae056","url":null,"abstract":"s Through a close textual analysis of US diplomatic cables and other relevant documents, this article provides new empirical data to trace the mutual construction of Mali as a site of terrorist threat. It argues that this mutual construction paradoxically enhanced the agency of Malian foreign policy elites in negotiations with their US interlocutors and highlights the effectiveness of Malian deployment of this discourse to shape the terms upon which intervention took place in the 2002–2012 period. It shifts the focus of the analysis of intervention in Mali both in space and in time through centering the US–Mali relationship pre-2012, displacing the dominant post-2013 France–Mali frame. This opens up a new dialectical and interimperial perspective on the agency of the Malian foreign policy elite in shaping the terms upon which intervention took place. This demonstrates the need for both a wider lens and a longer historical scope on investigations of intervention, particularly relevant as this discourse of terrorist threat has since 2013 spread beyond Mali to the wider Sahel region.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140539052","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
s How do citizens of US allies assess different reassurance strategies? This article investigates the effects of US reassurance policies on public opinion in allied states. We design and conduct a survey experiment in five Central–Eastern European states—Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania—in March 2022. Set against the backdrop of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, this experiment asked respondents to evaluate four types of reassurance strategies, each a critical tool in US crisis response policy: military deployments, diplomatic summitry, economic sanctions, and public reaffirmations of security guarantees. The international security literature typically values capabilities for their deterrence and reassurance benefits, while largely dismissing public reaffirmations as “cheap talk” and economic sanctions as being ineffective. Yet we find preferences for the use of economic sanctions and public statements as reassurance strategies during crises, in part because these approaches help states manage escalation risks.
s 美国盟国的公民如何评价不同的再保证战略？本文研究了美国安抚政策对盟国民意的影响。我们于 2022 年 3 月在五个中东欧国家--爱沙尼亚、拉脱维亚、立陶宛、波兰和罗马尼亚--设计并开展了一项调查实验。实验以俄罗斯入侵乌克兰为背景，要求受访者评估四种安抚策略，每种策略都是美国危机应对政策的重要工具：军事部署、外交峰会、经济制裁和公开重申安全保证。国际安全文献通常重视能力的威慑和安抚作用，而将公开重申视为 "廉价言论"，并认为经济制裁无效。然而，我们发现在危机期间，人们更倾向于使用经济制裁和公开声明作为安抚策略，部分原因是这些方法有助于国家管理危机升级的风险。
{"title":"Credibility in Crises: How Patrons Reassure Their Allies","authors":"Lauren Sukin, Alexander Lanoszka","doi":"10.1093/isq/sqae062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae062","url":null,"abstract":"s How do citizens of US allies assess different reassurance strategies? This article investigates the effects of US reassurance policies on public opinion in allied states. We design and conduct a survey experiment in five Central–Eastern European states—Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania—in March 2022. Set against the backdrop of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, this experiment asked respondents to evaluate four types of reassurance strategies, each a critical tool in US crisis response policy: military deployments, diplomatic summitry, economic sanctions, and public reaffirmations of security guarantees. The international security literature typically values capabilities for their deterrence and reassurance benefits, while largely dismissing public reaffirmations as “cheap talk” and economic sanctions as being ineffective. Yet we find preferences for the use of economic sanctions and public statements as reassurance strategies during crises, in part because these approaches help states manage escalation risks.","PeriodicalId":48313,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Quarterly","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140534109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：