Toward a Theory of Weakness Politics: Does Weakness Rule the World?

This article argues that the debate on “new wars” and “post-Westphalian” wars and conflicts misses a crucial dimension, that of the importance of weakness in the relations between states as well as between states and non-state entities. Most analyses of war examine power relationships between states as if power were an essential determinant of success or failure in war. Recent wars, however, show that weakness can in fact become a strength, that inequality is not so much a problem as an advantage. The author suggests the need to rename and re-problematise “new wars” as “new international conflicts” (NICs), for otherwise we miss the fundamental reasons why “powers” are often defeated, or at least held at bay by the “weakness” of their adversaries. Suggestions will also be made about how to potentially resolve such unequal conflicts and wars.     

Gaining Access to the “World's Largest Men's Club”: Women Leading UN Agencies

Following the establishment of UN Women in 2010 and the appointment of Christine Lagarde to the position of International Monetary Fund Managing Director in 2011, it appears that today the United Nations (UN) takes gender equality seriously, even within its own leadership ranks. Yet, while research on Women in Politics has paid little attention to women in international organisations, research on leadership in international organisations ignores the question of gender. This is despite an inherent connection between women's political careers domestically and internationally. Evidence suggests that although women have broken through the glass ceiling in international organisations and thus gained access to what has been termed the “world's largest men's club”, women continue to be systematically constrained in a way that enables them to gain access to leadership positions only in specific ways and under specific circumstances. Analysing the role of quotas and the nature of organisations in enabling access through the “glass ceiling”, the limitations of “glass walls” that channel women into gender-specific portfolios, situational dimensions such organisational crisis and instability, and the role of kinship in facilitating access, this paper shows that despite its potential to model and incentivise gender equality, the UN merely replicates domestic patterns of gender inequality.     

Entering Through the Sport’s Door? Kosovo’s Sport Diplomatic Endeavours Towards International Recognition

ABSTRACT

In December 2014, the International Olympic Committee [IOC] granted full membership to Kosovo. For the young state, which had declared its independence only in 2008, this decision meant that it could take part in the upcoming 2016 Summer Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro. This analysis illustrates the significance of Kosovo’s full IOC membership. Arguing that IOC membership can be identified as both the “end” and “beginning” of Kosovo’s diplomatic endeavour towards international recognition, the role of sport within this process is illuminated. It mirrors the strategic value of representative sport for a nation-building process as well as its particular significance for public diplomacy in Kosovo. Kosovar political elites shifted their focus towards sport because “traditional” diplomatic efforts, despite being successful to a certain extent, could not break the seemingly cemented status quo considering its United Nations [UN] status. Inclusion in the “Olympic family” represents more than just a symbolic victory for Kosovar diplomacy. The Kosovar nation-building and -branding process, emblematised through the “soft power” of representative sport, could be increasingly used to create symbolic pressure on states that have not yet recognised Kosovo; its ultimate diplomatic goal remains to enter the UN, even if it has to be through “sport’s door.”     

India and the dialectics of domestic and international “land grabbing”: Historical perspectives,current debates,and the case of Ethiopia

International land “acquisition” or land “grabbing” has become a global phenomenon in which India plays an increasingly important role. While there is a critical domestic debate regarding land deals within India — especially pertaining to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act of 2014 — there is practically no such debate regarding international land deals by Indian companies in Sub-Saharan Africa. By applying a two-level discourse analysis, this article argues that the land discourse within India can be understood as a strategy of exclusion. By linking land issues with questions of “development,” the discursive strategies of powerful actors lead to the exclusion of the arguments of NGOs and others opposed to the land deals from the discourse within India. This strategy of exclusion is then taken to the extreme with the strategy of securitization outside India: land deals are linked to “food security,” as the example of Ethiopia highlights.     

United Nations Peacekeeping Decisions: Three Hierarchies,Upward Mobility and Institutionalised Inequality among Member States

ABSTRACT

This article explores the multiple and evolving hierarchies shaping UN decisions on peacekeeping operations. Three hierarchies—based on Security Council membership, financial assessments, and troop contributions—currently distribute influence over these decisions among UN member states. These hierarchies differ in their relationship to global stratification patterns, and in the states they empower. Their gradual “layering” has thus expanded the potential for upward mobility within the UN: states unable to increase their influence in one hierarchy can seek empowerment in another. Yet the UN peacekeeping case also highlights the limitations of hierarchy layering as an equalising mechanism in international organisations. New hierarchies supplement rather than replace older ones, and the degree to which they challenge existing rankings varies. Moreover, each new hierarchy inherently highlights, and creates institutional consequences for, a particular type of inequality among states. Consequently, hierarchy layering is best understood as recalibrating rather than eliminating institutionalised inequality in international organisations.     

Deconstructing the “Deep State”: Subordinate Bureaucratic Politics in U.S. National Security

Does America really have a national security “deep state”? If by this loaded term we simply mean a sprawling bureaucracy filled mostly by a permanent cadre of lower-level officials, then inarguably the answer is yes. But how much influence does this so-called “deep state” exert, and to what ends? This debate conspicuously lacks for useful academic insight about the “real” deep state. For various reasons, the international relations field of foreign policy analysis (FPA) has largely neglected to study the role, motivation, and influence of lower-level bureaucrats. We seek to redress this knowledge gap by suggesting a new conceptual paradigm of subordinate bureaucratic politics to augment existing models for explaining American national security decisions. This additional lens enriches the analytic toolkit of FPA by revealing hitherto underappreciated dynamics including intra- and trans-agency bargaining, the key role of issue-driven interest coalitions, and persistent divisions such as between regional and functional issues.     

The “sleep-walking giant” awakes: resetting German foreign and security policy

A quarter of a century after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the role of the Bundesrepublik in Europe is once again the focus of international scrutiny and academic debate. Having long been seen as a “reflexive multilateralist” and “tamed power”, with a “leadership avoidance reflex” and a “civilian power” strategic culture, the Eurozone crisis has pushed the Berlin Republic into the role of “reluctant hegemon”. At the same time, however, Germany has been widely criticized by its EU and NATO partners for its half-hearted commitment to the Afghan war and its failure to support its allies in the Libyan intervention. Prompted by a call by Federal President Joachim Gauck in 2013 for Germany to live up to its international responsibilities, new themes in foreign and security policy have recently emerged. At the Munich Security Conference in February 2014, a more active and engaged approach was outlined by both the Foreign and Defence Ministers. This paper will examine recent shifts in the discourse of German foreign and security policy, and considers the extent to which these have been accompanied by significant shifts in policy outcome and implementation – particularly in the light of the Ukrainian crisis.     

Beyond the “Norm Entrepreneur” Model: Rwanda,Darfur, and Social Sanction among UN Diplomats

When investigating why state decision makers opt for intervention in the heart of armed violence abroad, many scholars refer to new humanitarian norms appearing among state officers, particularly within the UN. In these approaches, “norm entrepreneurs”, and the high risks of public opprobrium they are supposed to induce, stand at the front stage of normative change. Compliance with newly promoted normative ideas seems totally bereft of professional risks, though. This paper intends to bring back in a dimension of norms that is central in sociology: social sanction. Investigating how social sanctions are practically enacted among diplomats at the United Nations precisely provides useful data to detect the many norms that prosper beyond—and before—normative enterprises, and to assess why the humanitarian idea and the recent “responsibility to protect” still have weak normative effects, practically speaking. The international failures in Rwanda and more recently in Darfur deserve re-examination in this prospect.     

Neo‐nationalism and Neo‐Atlanticism in Italian foreign policy

The European Union has low expectations for the international climate regime after 2012, when the Kyoto Protocol effectively expires. The United States is not thought likely to sign up to new binding international commitments, whereas EU countries have experienced unexpected difficulties in implementing existing commitments. As a consequence, the European Union may be prepared to settle for a surprisingly weak follow-up to the Kyoto Protocol. At the same time, the European Union will pursue bilateral and regional climate agreements with like-minded countries, parallel to the UN framework and possibly independently of it. Collectively, such agreements could produce an international climate regime that is more robust than what could be agreed at the consensus-based UN level. Nevertheless, the European Union will continue to support the UN process as the only legitimate forum for international negotiations on climate change.     

“But the UN Said So …”: International Organisations as Discursive Authorities

Many scholars take it as given that international governmental and non-governmental actors play a decisive role in international politics as regulative, moral or epistemic authorities. Hence, a denationalised “multi-centric world” (James Rosenau) is said to be emerging, although empirical evidence for this is incomplete at best. Building on a variety of communication theoretical approaches, I argue for a clear-cut differentiation between authority and the power of the better argument. Moreover, I claim that, by looking at the way actors select and refer to the statements of others (“authority talk”), we can research the reproduction of authority as a specific type of relational power exercised by a variety of political actors, including governments, international agencies and non-state actors. The usefulness of this kind of analytical framework for researching an emerging “world authority structure” (John Boli) is illustrated, using speeches and news pieces on the humanitarian crisis in Sudan/Darfur. Results suggest that the common perception of an existing “non-governmental order” in humanitarian politics is highly exaggerated. Instead, what we see is a high degree of “UN-isation” of debate and a pivotal role of national governments that are widely acknowledged as authoritative sources of meaning.     

The UN Global Compact and the Global Governance of Corporate Social Responsibility: Complex Multilateralism for a More Human Globalisation?

In recent years, questions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) have developed into a global policy issue. Multinational corporations, as high-profile representatives of economic transnationalisation and globalisation, have come under ever closer scrutiny in regard to their actual development impact, especially in Third World countries. The UN Global Compact as an example for evolving “complex multilateralism on a global level” aims at solving two problems at once, namely the implementation of minimum standards of “good corporate conduct” and socio-economic development, especially of poor countries. In a paradigmatic policy shift, the United Nations has fostered close partnerships with global business to promote CSR and socio-economic development, thereby opening the UN system to private business interests. This shift has been criticised by many civil society actors. Despite its remarkable achievements, the Global Compact reveals many problems of contemporary global governance related to its understanding of globalisation, the implementation and control of its core norms and rules as well as in regard to issues of transparency and democratic legitimacy. Finally, the Global Compact serves to illustrate how international institutions try to adapt to the growing complexity of development and economic governance issues and the larger influence of non-state actors in the global political economy.     

United Nations Security Council Reform Revisited: A Proposal

The United Nations [UN] came into being following the Second World War. Resembling earlier efforts of co-operation by the most powerful states of the international system, it was an attempt to effect global governance through the maintenance of international peace and security amongst states. However, led by its main executive organ, the Security Council, the UN has been unable to prevent and effectively deal with armed conflicts and mass atrocities in a number of situations. Over the years, the inability of the UN Security Council to take collective action has resulted in its ineffectiveness in dealing with war and humanitarian crises. This situation has led to calls for Security Council reform and has generated several initiatives to that end. This analysis discusses major shortcomings of the Security Council, analyses prominent reform initiatives, and introduces a proposal, the “Two-Layered Regional Model,” for Security Council reform.     

Power and Rhetorical Bargaining: The UN Security Council Debate on the Iraq War

The UN Security Council (UNSC) was an important arena of confrontation between the major powers during the recent pre-war crisis on Iraq, yet the realist-materialist focus of IR theory does not provide a useful perspective for analysing the debate and the ensuing defeat of American interests. This paper seeks to establish the meaning of “power” within a rhetorical context, applying insights from Searle's theory of institutional facts, constructivism, and self-presentation theory. Rhetorical strategies are then examined empirically by means of thematic and structural analyses of key texts from the UNSC debate on Iraq.     

Why Germany Won’t Be Dropping Bombs on Syria,Iraq or Mali

Following the Paris terrorist attacks of November 2015, Germany's Angela Merkel promised “to give France every support” in its war against jihadi terrorist groups, affirming that the “the Islamic State must be fought militarily.” After considerable debate, the Bundestag approved the deployment of German forces to the Middle East, Mali, and elsewhere, leading some to claim that Germany has set aside its reservations regarding the utility of force. A closer look at German contributions to UN and NATO missions from the 1990s through 2016 reveals, however, that Germany continues to draw a red line in terms of coercive airpower and direct combat operations. This reluctance stems from its interpretation of the past, demonstrating that constructivist approaches to strategic culture remain valid.     

UN sanctions burden sharing: Article 50 of the UN charter and assistance to third states

This article proposes the establishment by the UN Security Council of a system of mutual support for third states whose economies have been adversely affected as a result of UN non-military sanctions. This system consists of several components: (1) creating new markets for the sale of goods and services of third states; (2) crafting of a logical UN sanctions costs methodology; (3) bringing into UN Security Council for a those bilateral and regional efforts involving cases of UN sanctions compensation; (4) devising norms and procedures for acquiring and pooling of the requisite funds out of which states' claims for damages attributable to UN sanctions might be satisfied; and (5) establishing a mechanism for the adjudication of such claims. While many obstacles admittedly exist to creating such a system of mutual support, the article argues that effective UN sanctions burden sharing is nevertheless important to international relations theory and practice, since UN sanctions appear to be increasing in frequency as they undergird many of the Security Council's contemporary enforcement actions.     

Polarity,preponderance and power parity in the generation of international conflict

Almost a decade ago one of the authors introduced the concepts of “opportunity” and “willingness” in this journal (Starr, 1978). We have since devoted considerable attention to clarifying these concepts and their relationship to international conflict. In a series of recent articles we have focused on the micro/decision making/willingness level. In the present discussion we expand more fully on the macro/system/opportunity level, demonstrating through the use of logic and simulation that such decision processes operate within structures which appear logically to set limits, ceilings or constraints on the amount of conflict which is possible. We do so by using the different positions regarding polarity and conflict, and the parity vs. preponderance debate as starting points; (and come to some non‐obvious conclusions on the roles of power and system structure).     

“Systemically Significant States”: Tracing the G20’s Membership Category as a New Logic of Stratification in the International System

ABSTRACT

The international system has long distinguished classes of states, such as “great powers”. Recently, “systemically significant states” has emerged as a new designation within global financial governance. This designation was introduced by the G7 to justify the new membership composition of the G20, and has since been adopted in policy documents and recommendations by other institutions, such as the IMF. This article traces the origins of the term “systemically significant” and argues that, although nominally meant to be a term of inclusion and a signal of the pluralisation of governance authority, it instead serves as a new category of stratification rooted in a neoliberal governmentality of risk.     

UN sanctions burden sharing: Article 50 of the UN charter and assistance to third states

abstract

This article proposes the establishment by the UN Security Council of a system of mutual support for third states whose economies have been adversely affected as a result of UN non‐military sanctions. This system consists of several components: (1) creating new markets for the sale of goods and services of third states; (2) crafting of a logical UN sanctions costs methodology; (3) bringing into UN Security Council for a those bilateral and regional efforts involving cases of UN sanctions compensation; (4) devising norms and procedures for acquiring and pooling of the requisite funds out of which states’ claims for damages attributable to UN sanctions might be satisfied; and (5) establishing a mechanism for the adjudication of such claims. While many obstacles admittedly exist to creating such a system of mutual support, the article argues that effective UN sanctions burden sharing is nevertheless important to international relations theory and practice, since UN sanctions appear to be increasing in frequency as they undergird many of the Security Council's contemporary enforcement actions.     

Toward an effective international legal order: from coexistence to concert?

In forbidding the use of force except in self‐defence against armed attack or when authorised by the Security Council, the UN Charter appears to be the culminating development of a system of international order based on the doctrine of state sovereignty. The cumulative result of international‐law‐related acts, omissions and declarations of the Bush administration since its inception can be construed as a fundamental challenge to the sovereign state system. The administration's stated security strategy is one possible response to undoubtedly grave challenges to national and human security. In fact, only an institutionalised partnership between the US and regional powers such as China, India, Brazil and Germany can hope to address those challenges successfully, in part because only it would have the requisite legitimacy. That partnership or concert could be organised within the UN framework, albeit intensifying its hierarchical elements.     

Who Liberalizes? Explaining Preferential Trade Liberalization

Despite the growth in research on preferential trade arrangements (PTAs), few studies have systematically explored why some PTAs have been more successful than others at liberalizing trade among members. In this paper I test four hypotheses concerning intra-PTA liberalization: a regional system structure hypothesis, an international institutions hypothesis, a domestic institutions hypothesis, and an economic hypothesis. Although all four types of variables are statistically significant, only international institutions have substantively large effects on intra-PTA liberalization. This suggests that policymakers have considerable latitude to promote integration, as the impact of “choice” variables such as international institutions far outweighs that of “given” factors such as regional system structure or the nature of member economies.