共鸣、拒绝、重新诠释:描绘联合国安理会的稳定话语,2000 - 2014

IF 0.6 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Stability-International Journal of Security and Development Pub Date : 2015-10-29 DOI:10.5334/STA.GM
D. Curran, P. Holtom
{"title":"共鸣、拒绝、重新诠释:描绘联合国安理会的稳定话语,2000 - 2014","authors":"D. Curran, P. Holtom","doi":"10.5334/STA.GM","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article charts the evolution of the conceptualisation of stabilization in the UN Security Council (UNSC) during the period 2001–2014. UNSC open meetings provide an important dataset for a critical review of stabilization discourse and an opportunity to chart the positions of permanent Members, rotating Members and the UN Secretariat towards this concept. This article is the first to conduct an analysis of this material to map the evolution of stabilization in this critical chamber of the UN. This dataset of official statements will be complemented by a review of open source reporting on UNSC meetings and national stabilization doctrines of the ‘P3’ – France, the UK and the US. These countries have developed national stabilization doctrines predominantly to deal with cross-governmental approaches to counterinsurgency operations conducted during the 2000s. The article therefore presents a genealogy of the concept of stabilization in the UNSC to help understand implications for its future development in this multilateral setting. This article begins by examining efforts by the P3 to ‘upload’ their conceptualisations of stabilization into UN intervention frameworks. Secondly, the article uses a content analysis of UNSC debates during 2000–2014 to explore the extent to which the conceptualisation of stabilization resonated with other Council members, were rejected in specific contexts or in general, or were re-interpreted by member states to suit alternative security agendas and interests. Therefore, the article not only examines the UNSC debates surrounding existing UN ‘stabilization operations’ (MONUSCO, MINUSTAH, MINUSCA, MINUSMA), which could be regarded as evidence that this ‘western’ concept has resonated with other UNSC members and relevant UN agencies, but also documents the appearance of stabilization in other contexts too. The article opens new avenues of research into concepts of stabilization within the UN, and seeks to provide a thorough accounting of the origins, spread, and potential trajectories for the concept and practice of stabilization in UN contexts.","PeriodicalId":44806,"journal":{"name":"Stability-International Journal of Security and Development","volume":"16 1","pages":"50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"33","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resonating, Rejecting, Reinterpreting: Mapping the Stabilization Discourse in the United Nations Security Council, 2000–14\",\"authors\":\"D. Curran, P. Holtom\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/STA.GM\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article charts the evolution of the conceptualisation of stabilization in the UN Security Council (UNSC) during the period 2001–2014. UNSC open meetings provide an important dataset for a critical review of stabilization discourse and an opportunity to chart the positions of permanent Members, rotating Members and the UN Secretariat towards this concept. This article is the first to conduct an analysis of this material to map the evolution of stabilization in this critical chamber of the UN. This dataset of official statements will be complemented by a review of open source reporting on UNSC meetings and national stabilization doctrines of the ‘P3’ – France, the UK and the US. These countries have developed national stabilization doctrines predominantly to deal with cross-governmental approaches to counterinsurgency operations conducted during the 2000s. The article therefore presents a genealogy of the concept of stabilization in the UNSC to help understand implications for its future development in this multilateral setting. This article begins by examining efforts by the P3 to ‘upload’ their conceptualisations of stabilization into UN intervention frameworks. Secondly, the article uses a content analysis of UNSC debates during 2000–2014 to explore the extent to which the conceptualisation of stabilization resonated with other Council members, were rejected in specific contexts or in general, or were re-interpreted by member states to suit alternative security agendas and interests. Therefore, the article not only examines the UNSC debates surrounding existing UN ‘stabilization operations’ (MONUSCO, MINUSTAH, MINUSCA, MINUSMA), which could be regarded as evidence that this ‘western’ concept has resonated with other UNSC members and relevant UN agencies, but also documents the appearance of stabilization in other contexts too. The article opens new avenues of research into concepts of stabilization within the UN, and seeks to provide a thorough accounting of the origins, spread, and potential trajectories for the concept and practice of stabilization in UN contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44806,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Stability-International Journal of Security and Development\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"50\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"33\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Stability-International Journal of Security and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/STA.GM\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stability-International Journal of Security and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/STA.GM","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33

摘要

本文描绘了2001年至2014年期间联合国安理会稳定概念的演变。联合国安理会公开会议提供了一个重要的数据集,用于批判性地审查稳定的论述,并有机会描绘常任理事国、轮值理事国和联合国秘书处对这一概念的立场。本文首次对这些材料进行分析,以描绘联合国这一关键机构的稳定演变。官方声明的数据集将通过对联合国安理会会议和“P3”(法国、英国和美国)国家稳定理论的开源报告的审查来补充。这些国家制定了国家稳定原则,主要是为了应对2000年代进行的跨政府反叛乱行动。因此,本文提出了联合国安理会稳定概念的谱系,以帮助理解其在这种多边环境下未来发展的影响。本文首先考察P3将其稳定化概念“上载”到联合国干预框架中的努力。其次,本文对2000年至2014年期间联合国安理会的辩论进行了内容分析,以探讨稳定的概念在多大程度上与其他安理会成员国产生了共鸣,在特定情况下或总体上被拒绝,或者被成员国重新解释以适应其他安全议程和利益。因此,本文不仅研究了联合国安理会围绕现有的联合国“稳定行动”(联刚稳定团、联海稳定团、中非稳定团、中非稳定团)的辩论,这可以被视为“西方”概念与其他联合国安理会成员国和相关联合国机构产生共鸣的证据,而且还记录了稳定在其他背景下的出现。本文为研究联合国内部的稳定概念开辟了新的途径,并试图为联合国背景下的稳定概念和实践的起源、传播和潜在轨迹提供全面的说明。
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
Resonating, Rejecting, Reinterpreting: Mapping the Stabilization Discourse in the United Nations Security Council, 2000–14
This article charts the evolution of the conceptualisation of stabilization in the UN Security Council (UNSC) during the period 2001–2014. UNSC open meetings provide an important dataset for a critical review of stabilization discourse and an opportunity to chart the positions of permanent Members, rotating Members and the UN Secretariat towards this concept. This article is the first to conduct an analysis of this material to map the evolution of stabilization in this critical chamber of the UN. This dataset of official statements will be complemented by a review of open source reporting on UNSC meetings and national stabilization doctrines of the ‘P3’ – France, the UK and the US. These countries have developed national stabilization doctrines predominantly to deal with cross-governmental approaches to counterinsurgency operations conducted during the 2000s. The article therefore presents a genealogy of the concept of stabilization in the UNSC to help understand implications for its future development in this multilateral setting. This article begins by examining efforts by the P3 to ‘upload’ their conceptualisations of stabilization into UN intervention frameworks. Secondly, the article uses a content analysis of UNSC debates during 2000–2014 to explore the extent to which the conceptualisation of stabilization resonated with other Council members, were rejected in specific contexts or in general, or were re-interpreted by member states to suit alternative security agendas and interests. Therefore, the article not only examines the UNSC debates surrounding existing UN ‘stabilization operations’ (MONUSCO, MINUSTAH, MINUSCA, MINUSMA), which could be regarded as evidence that this ‘western’ concept has resonated with other UNSC members and relevant UN agencies, but also documents the appearance of stabilization in other contexts too. The article opens new avenues of research into concepts of stabilization within the UN, and seeks to provide a thorough accounting of the origins, spread, and potential trajectories for the concept and practice of stabilization in UN contexts.
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
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Stability: International Journal of Security & Development is a fundamentally new kind of journal. Open-access, it publishes research quickly and free of charge in order to have a maximal impact upon policy and practice communities. It fills a crucial niche. Despite the allocation of significant policy attention and financial resources to a perceived relationship between development assistance, security and stability, a solid evidence base is still lacking. Research in this area, while growing rapidly, is scattered across journals focused upon broader topics such as international development, international relations and security studies. Accordingly, Stability''s objective is to: Foster an accessible and rigorous evidence base, clearly communicated and widely disseminated, to guide future thinking, policymaking and practice concerning communities and states experiencing widespread violence and conflict. The journal will accept submissions from a wide variety of disciplines, including development studies, international relations, politics, economics, anthropology, sociology, psychology and history, among others. In addition to focusing upon large-scale armed conflict and insurgencies, Stability will address the challenge posed by local and regional violence within ostensibly stable settings such as Mexico, Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia and elsewhere.
期刊最新文献
Civil-Military Engagement During Public Health Emergencies: A Comparative Analysis of Domestic Responses to COVID 19 Legitimate Targets: What is the Applicable Legal Framework Governing the Use of Force in Rio de Janeiro? Challenging how Danger is Understood: A Research Practitioners’ Note on Migration in Africa Housing, Land and Property Rights as War-Financing Commodities: A Typology with Lessons from Darfur, Colombia and Syria Reflections on the Evolution of Conflict Early Warning
×
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