你需要多少团结?欧盟对外安全合作中的系统性争论

IF 2.7 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES European Security Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI:10.1080/09662839.2021.1947800
H. Maurer, Nicholas Wright
{"title":"你需要多少团结?欧盟对外安全合作中的系统性争论","authors":"H. Maurer, Nicholas Wright","doi":"10.1080/09662839.2021.1947800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Common Foreign & Security Policy (CFSP) is a transnational policy framework to deliver collective foreign policy and also to manage differences among member states. As such, it has always been dependent on their support. Since 2019, however, disagreement within this system is said to have reached a new level. Taking this political trend as our starting point, this article proposes a new, conceptual approach to understanding how contestation challenges the EU’s foreign policy cooperation system. While the majority of research focuses on disagreements in decision-making, we argue for a broader conceptualisation – systemic contestation. Drawing on norm contestation scholarship, we argue that systemic contestation manifests itself in two ways: as passive contestation, when member states disengage from and fail to take ownership of CFSP initiatives and their implementation; and as tacit contestation, when they fail to act when faced with the need to safeguard the system. This approach accounts for the transgovernmental character of the CFSP; and the central role of member states within it. Finally, we contend that our conceptualisation of systemic contestation offers promising new avenues for empirical research to understand the “black box” of EU foreign policy cooperation.","PeriodicalId":46331,"journal":{"name":"European Security","volume":"30 1","pages":"385 - 401"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How much unity do you need? Systemic contestation in EU foreign and security cooperation\",\"authors\":\"H. Maurer, Nicholas Wright\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09662839.2021.1947800\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Common Foreign & Security Policy (CFSP) is a transnational policy framework to deliver collective foreign policy and also to manage differences among member states. As such, it has always been dependent on their support. Since 2019, however, disagreement within this system is said to have reached a new level. Taking this political trend as our starting point, this article proposes a new, conceptual approach to understanding how contestation challenges the EU’s foreign policy cooperation system. While the majority of research focuses on disagreements in decision-making, we argue for a broader conceptualisation – systemic contestation. Drawing on norm contestation scholarship, we argue that systemic contestation manifests itself in two ways: as passive contestation, when member states disengage from and fail to take ownership of CFSP initiatives and their implementation; and as tacit contestation, when they fail to act when faced with the need to safeguard the system. This approach accounts for the transgovernmental character of the CFSP; and the central role of member states within it. Finally, we contend that our conceptualisation of systemic contestation offers promising new avenues for empirical research to understand the “black box” of EU foreign policy cooperation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46331,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Security\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"385 - 401\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2021.1947800\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Security","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2021.1947800","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: 5

摘要

摘要:共同外交与安全政策(CFSP)是一个跨国政策框架,旨在实施集体外交政策,并管理成员国之间的分歧。因此,它一直依赖于他们的支持。然而,自2019年以来,据说该体系内部的分歧达到了一个新的水平。本文以这一政治趋势为出发点,提出了一种新的、概念性的方法来理解竞争如何挑战欧盟的外交政策合作体系。虽然大多数研究都集中在决策中的分歧上,但我们主张更广泛的概念化——系统性争论。根据规范竞争理论,我们认为系统性竞争表现为两种方式:作为被动竞争,当成员国脱离并未能掌握CFSP倡议及其实施的所有权时;以及当他们在面临保护制度的需要时未能采取行动时,作为默认的竞争。这种方法说明了CFSP的跨政府性质;以及成员国在其中的核心作用。最后,我们认为,我们对系统性争论的概念化为实证研究提供了有希望的新途径,以理解欧盟外交政策合作的“黑匣子”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How much unity do you need? Systemic contestation in EU foreign and security cooperation
ABSTRACT The Common Foreign & Security Policy (CFSP) is a transnational policy framework to deliver collective foreign policy and also to manage differences among member states. As such, it has always been dependent on their support. Since 2019, however, disagreement within this system is said to have reached a new level. Taking this political trend as our starting point, this article proposes a new, conceptual approach to understanding how contestation challenges the EU’s foreign policy cooperation system. While the majority of research focuses on disagreements in decision-making, we argue for a broader conceptualisation – systemic contestation. Drawing on norm contestation scholarship, we argue that systemic contestation manifests itself in two ways: as passive contestation, when member states disengage from and fail to take ownership of CFSP initiatives and their implementation; and as tacit contestation, when they fail to act when faced with the need to safeguard the system. This approach accounts for the transgovernmental character of the CFSP; and the central role of member states within it. Finally, we contend that our conceptualisation of systemic contestation offers promising new avenues for empirical research to understand the “black box” of EU foreign policy cooperation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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