导言:CFSP的争论和政治化的阴影

IF 2.7 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES European Security Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI:10.1080/09662839.2021.1964473
Katja Biedenkopf, Oriol Costa, Magdalena Góra
{"title":"导言:CFSP的争论和政治化的阴影","authors":"Katja Biedenkopf, Oriol Costa, Magdalena Góra","doi":"10.1080/09662839.2021.1964473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Contestation and politicisation are two concepts of increasing relevance to European foreign and security policy (CFSP) scholars and practitioners alike. However, reasonable doubts can be raised as regards this growing literature: first, political conflict has always been part of CFSP, and national and European politics have traditionally been at the centre of research in this field. Second, exploring how the two concepts relate to European foreign, security and defence policies is complicated by the fact that foreign affairs more broadly do not meet all the criteria set by the literature on politicisation, which usually requires that some form of mass mobilisation takes place, or at least a high degree of salience. This article addresses these concerns by looking at the changing politics of CFSP. As the introduction to the special issue, we explore the hypothesis that contestation of European foreign, security and defence policy is now more in line with the broader way in which political conflict is being re-structured in Europe. If this is so, political conflict over CFSP will more easily be associated with issues that have an appeal beyond the narrow community of its practitioners and observers.","PeriodicalId":46331,"journal":{"name":"European Security","volume":"30 1","pages":"325 - 343"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction: shades of contestation and politicisation of CFSP\",\"authors\":\"Katja Biedenkopf, Oriol Costa, Magdalena Góra\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09662839.2021.1964473\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Contestation and politicisation are two concepts of increasing relevance to European foreign and security policy (CFSP) scholars and practitioners alike. However, reasonable doubts can be raised as regards this growing literature: first, political conflict has always been part of CFSP, and national and European politics have traditionally been at the centre of research in this field. Second, exploring how the two concepts relate to European foreign, security and defence policies is complicated by the fact that foreign affairs more broadly do not meet all the criteria set by the literature on politicisation, which usually requires that some form of mass mobilisation takes place, or at least a high degree of salience. This article addresses these concerns by looking at the changing politics of CFSP. As the introduction to the special issue, we explore the hypothesis that contestation of European foreign, security and defence policy is now more in line with the broader way in which political conflict is being re-structured in Europe. If this is so, political conflict over CFSP will more easily be associated with issues that have an appeal beyond the narrow community of its practitioners and observers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46331,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Security\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"325 - 343\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2021.1964473\",\"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/10.1080/09662839.2021.1964473","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: 14

摘要

争论和政治化是与欧洲外交和安全政策(CFSP)学者和实践者越来越相关的两个概念。然而,对于这种不断增长的文献,可以提出合理的怀疑:首先,政治冲突一直是CFSP的一部分,国家和欧洲政治传统上一直是该领域研究的中心。其次,探究这两个概念与欧洲外交、安全和防务政策之间的关系是复杂的,因为更广泛的外交事务并不符合有关政治化的文献所设定的所有标准,而政治化通常需要某种形式的群众动员,或者至少是高度的突出。本文通过观察CFSP不断变化的政治来解决这些问题。作为特刊的引言,我们探讨了这样一个假设,即欧洲外交、安全和防务政策的争论现在更符合欧洲政治冲突重组的更广泛方式。如果是这样的话,关于CFSP的政治冲突将更容易与那些在其实践者和观察者的狭窄社区之外具有吸引力的问题联系起来。
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
Introduction: shades of contestation and politicisation of CFSP
ABSTRACT Contestation and politicisation are two concepts of increasing relevance to European foreign and security policy (CFSP) scholars and practitioners alike. However, reasonable doubts can be raised as regards this growing literature: first, political conflict has always been part of CFSP, and national and European politics have traditionally been at the centre of research in this field. Second, exploring how the two concepts relate to European foreign, security and defence policies is complicated by the fact that foreign affairs more broadly do not meet all the criteria set by the literature on politicisation, which usually requires that some form of mass mobilisation takes place, or at least a high degree of salience. This article addresses these concerns by looking at the changing politics of CFSP. As the introduction to the special issue, we explore the hypothesis that contestation of European foreign, security and defence policy is now more in line with the broader way in which political conflict is being re-structured in Europe. If this is so, political conflict over CFSP will more easily be associated with issues that have an appeal beyond the narrow community of its practitioners and observers.
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