A more martial Europe? Public opinion,permissive consensus,and EU defence policy

EU defence policy has been extremely popular over the past three decades, averaging around 75% public support. In fact, no other policy domain is as popular and robust as the idea of pooling national sovereignty over defence. However, public support for EU defence has been dismissed as mere “permissive consensus”, rather than genuine support. Scholars have often assumed that public opinion towards European integration is passive and shallow, especially over foreign policy issues, where the public has limited understanding of the complexity of issues. Consistent with contemporary findings about the complexity of comparative foreign policy attitudes, the authors contest the permissive consensus logic and demonstrate that European publics have held coherent preferences over the use of force at the European level. The authors conclude that the slow progress of integration in this area is due to the reluctance of elites rather than to the reticence of Europe’s citizens.     

French defence reforms after Kosovo: On track or derailed?

How well prepared has France been politically for the operational implications of its efforts to build a military instrument designed for extra‐territorial interventions such as that conducted by NATO in Yugoslavia in 1999? Did the prolonged bombing campaign and the question of deploying ground troops provoke severe criticism and controversies? This article assesses the French Kosovo debate both in the political centre and the broader elite public. The analysis finds that the new French military instrument receives solid backing from key policymakers who now race to claim parenthood of the military reform programme. The utility of a new military instrument was at one stage developing into a major concern to the elite public. However, an engineered anti‐American agenda hijacked the debate, failed to address military issues, and ultimately could not mobilize the elite public. The conclusion outlines that an energized political centre has an opportunity to press ahead with military reforms but also points out that the relationship between France, Europe, and NATO requires careful political management.     

Whither Lafayette? French military policy and the American campaign in Afghanistan

During the American‐led military campaign against international terrorism, France has sought to preserve its special status and role as a global power. This effort continues longstanding French policies designed to maintain autonomy in security and foreign policy areas. Such policies create differences and discord with the United States over coalition warfare. This article examines the underpinnings of American and French preferences for coalition military missions in the context of national policy and past military operations. A case study of French participation in the operations in Afghanistan provides the framework for analysis.     

Is the Russian federation becoming more democratic? Moscow‐regional relations and the development of the post‐Soviet Russian State

This article addresses the condition of Russian democracy by focusing on the developing political relations between the central government and regional governments. A situation of profound ambivalence and ambiguity has evolved since ratification of the Russian Federation Constitution in December 1993. Regional governments have found it possible to gain a degree of political autonomy uncharacteristic of Russia's long historical experience, yet increasingly in line with global trends toward decentralization of governmental authority. Two political patterns in the current Russian Federation are explored, both of them promising broad and enduring significance. First, the political ambiguity of relations between the national government and regional authorities may provide the context in which divided government serves to enable democracy, despite the appearance of authoritarian rule in many regions themselves. Second, the nature of the interaction between the centre and regional authorities may be breaking new ground, in terms of flexible solutions to intra‐state relations among different levels of government. Because certain aspects of centre‐regional relations in the Russian Federation replicate comparable issues elsewhere (particularly regarding the ethnic‐territorial dimension of politics), the Federation's approaches and solutions to this aspect of state‐formation could suggest useful lessons for other parts of the world.     

Is development studies becoming too brainy? A comparison of World Development Reports

This article argues that two types of “brainisation” hinder development studies researchers in their phronetic understanding of poor people’s realities. It first provides a literature review on two types of knowledge and their differences, as well as two types of brainisation and how they prevent development studies scholars gaining a holistic understanding of the marginalised. Subsequently, a comparative analysis is conducted on two World Development Reports. Finally, alternative scenarios are outlined for the “debrainisation” of development studies and researchers’ mind-sets by learning from the fundamental features of human life.     

Is “good” resettlement policy unimplementable? Learning from advocacy in Cambodia

Accountability advocacy is an increasingly common approach to working with displaced communities. This article explores a resettlement scheme for an Asian Development Bank project in Cambodia in which advocacy interventions resulted in significant improvements in resettlement sites over the eight years of the project. Resettlement standards improved in some of the sites so much that they might now be called “islands of governance”, tightly ring-fenced from the otherwise limited support provided ordinarily to displaced or landless Cambodians. Given these extremes, the article considers whether “good” resettlement policy is implementable. It also argues that best practice resettlement principles, such as the requirement to minimise displacement – no matter how sensible or well-intended when designed at an international level – have the potential for negative unintended consequences in implementation. These impacts cannot necessarily be mitigated through formal monitoring, oversight, and technical assistance. Building on the knowledge already available, it identifies five considerations relevant to resettlement programmes as they continue to evolve.     

The common European security and defence policy and the ‘third‐country’ issue

The Common European Security and Defence Policy (CESDP) of the European Union (EU) was launched in 1999 and has been perceived as a landmark step toward European security cooperation, particularly in the field of crisis management. Still in its early stages, some difficult issues have become apparent. Of these, the so‐called ‘third‐country’ issue may prove to be among the most significant. This problem refers to the necessity of associating states outside the EU with CESDP. In this regard, three states stand out — the United States, Turkey and Russia — and this article considers their concerns and the European response in detail. This is prefaced by a general overview of how the third‐country problem emerged and what the EU has done to address it. It concludes by suggesting that third‐country considerations could well determine where and how EU‐led missions operating under the auspices of CESDP are deployed.     

Missing the nuclear boat? British policy and French military nuclear ambitions during the EURATOM foundation negotiations, 1955–56

This paper examines the neglected nuclear dimension of the ‘relaunch’ of Europe at Messina. France favoured British membership of EURATOM and some interests in Britain saw the commercial and diplomatic advantages of Britain's leadership of the European nuclear industry. However, the possibility of a French military nuclear programme and European nuclear proliferation compounded Britain's established reluctance either to participate in European integration or to jeopardize the prospect of Anglo‐American nuclear weapons cooperation. Britain's aversion to using the hypothetical ‘nuclear card’ is a recurrent theme in Anglo‐French diplomacy.     

State–defence industry relations in the European context: French and UK interactions with the European Defence Agency

While many have noted that EU member states have different preferences over the prospect of an integrated EU defence, analyses that specifically explore state–industry relations in the definition of EU defence-industrial issues, and in the evolution of the Common Security and Defence Policy in general, are lacking. This is surprising, given that different configurations of government–industry relations have represented a persistent impediment to European defence-industrial cross-border collaboration. This article investigates how state–defence industry relations impact on member states’ preferences towards the EU defence-industrial framework. Based on the case studies of the interaction of France and the UK with the European Defence Agency, this analysis focuses on the difference between public and private defence firms’ governance settings as the crucial explanatory variable accounting for diverging member states’ preferences in this domain.     

The European Union’s partnership policy towards Brazil: more than meets the eye

This article focuses on the evolving nature of the foreign policy of the European Union (EU) towards Brazil, which gained momentum and became more dynamic and denser after the establishment of a formal strategic partnership (SP) in 2007. It provides a historical overview of the institutional relations between Brussels and Brasília, before proceeding with an analysis of the main drivers behind this novel development. The study goes on to offer a critical examination of the implementation of the EU–Brazil SP by casting light on both its major achievements and the challenges it has faced. It concludes that the establishment of a formal strategic partnership with Brazil has contributed to the strengthening of the EU’s globally oriented partnership policy and ultimately to the incremental empowerment of the EU necessary to the assertion of its values, objectives and interests on the international stage.     

Is Nationalism Intrinsically Violent?

This article analyzes the complex and contradictory relationships between nationalism and organized violence. The author challenges the approaches that see nationalism as being inherently linked with violence and demonstrates that nationalist ideology by itself is rarely a main cause of hostile acts. The article focuses on the different forms of organized violence including wars, revolutions, terrorism, and genocide. It aims to show that the relationship between violence and nationalism cannot be properly captured by the dominant intentionalist, naturalist, and formativist perspectives. Instead the case is made that the emphasis should be given to the long-term historical processes and the relative modernity of both nationalism and organized violence. The author argues that it is very difficult to generate sustained and organized violent nationalist action. The mutation of nationalist doctrines into violent acts is generally a product of unintended structural circumstances and is characterized by its temporary nature and volatility. More specifically, this process is usually generated by the coercive bureaucratization, centrifugal ideologization, and their capacity to be embedded in the networks of microsolidarity.     

Is democracy about redistribution?

Some scholars champion broad conceptualizations of democracy where distribution of economic resources is an integral part, whereas several prominent arguments drawing on narrower conceptualizations of democracy still assume that progressive redistribution is central to democratic politics. We empirically analyse individual opinions on whether progressive taxation and redistribution are among democracy's central characteristics. While many citizens around the world associate democracy with redistribution, we find that surprisingly few consider redistribution among the most central characteristics of democracy. We further analyse what factors affect individuals’ propensity to consider redistribution among democracy's most important features. Running multi-level models, we find that having lived under a communist regime and ? although less robust – currently living under democracy make individuals less likely to hold this notion. However, individuals with more to gain from progressive redistribution (that is, little education and belonging to lower classes) are more likely to hold it. We discuss how our findings help shed light on two puzzles in comparative politics; (I) why do democracies not promote more redistributive policies than autocracies, and (II) why is there no net relationship between income inequality and democratization?     

Where Is NATO Heading for?

A NATO summit was held on April 2-4 of this year in Bucharest, the capital of Romania. It was the last meeting the U.S. President George W. Bush attended in his presidential term. The outgoing Russian President A. Putin, also took part in the ＂NATO-Russia Council＂ meeting. Therefore, this summit attracted particular attention.     

Why Is There an ISIL?

In June 2014,the self-proclaimed Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)1——an extremist organization——suddenly appeared in Mosul in Northern Iraq.Since then it has rapidly expanded its sphere of influence,to incorporate much of northern and western Iraq.Strategists,both in China and overseas,are puzzling over this Islamic State.Some scholars argue that the west Asian political landscape that was carved out 100 years ago is collapsing.ISIL's influence is spreading throughout the Middle East and threatening global security.