Managing the EU Crises: Another Way of Integration by Stealth?

Europe has been hit hard by the financial and economic crisis, and there is no fast solution in view. The problem facing the EU is a problem of governance both technically and politically. Most actors, with the possible exception of the ECB, are in disarray because they are caught between the necessity to act and the political reluctance to acknowledge fully the consequences of a multi-level governance system, notably democratic legitimacy and accountability. The discrepancy between political rhetoric and actual practices during the crisis appears as a new form of government by stealth. There is not yet an obvious way out of this morass. The first one seems the easiest as it would be nothing more than ‘muddling through’ as usual, whereas the second option, a two-speed Europe, though more politically attractive, is technically very difficult to implement institutionally. The third possible solution is paradoxically the one that surreptitiously persists at present: a ‘federalism of executives’ that is both unmanageable in the long run and unacceptable from a democratic point of view.     

The Dual Use of an Historical Event: ‘Rwanda 1994’, the Justification and Critique of Liberal Interventionism

This essay places the 1994 genocide in Rwanda in the context of the academic and political rise of liberal interventionism since 1990. It argues that this historical event is important for the debate about ‘humanitarian interventions’ in two different ways: on the one hand, as a signifier, ‘Rwanda 1994’ has been used (or, for that matter, misused) in order to justify an almost unlimited international agenda of liberal interventionism and social engineering; on the other, the genocide that could arguably have been prevented represents the exceptional case where military intervention can indeed be justified—but precisely because it is not in need of a specifically liberal justification. What would have made a military-based prevention of genocide justifiable in this particular case is precisely the aim to prevent something that is universally agreed to be unacceptable (genocide). The liberal twist in the justification narrative, in contrast, tends to emphasize the difference between the (liberal) ‘us’ and the non-liberal ‘them’, consequently claiming the legitimate right for the ‘us’ to decide about the use of force exclusively, that is, without the ‘them’. The continuation of the narrative into answering the post-intervention question ‘what now?’ then leads consequently into the necessity of imposing one's own system of rule as a general norm without due attention to the specifics of the situation ‘on the ground’. The exceptional features of ‘Rwanda 1994’ (the empirical event) thus point in a critical way to all those cases where ‘Rwanda 1994’ (the signifier) has been used to make the case for an ever-expanding agenda of liberal (‘just’) war.     

Gender and Publication Patterns: Female Authorship Is Increasing,But Is There Gender Parity?

Women's authorship has historically been underrepresented in criminal justice publications. The current study updates previous research by examining the authorship patterns of articles published in 8 criminological journals spanning 2007 to 2013. Women's representation increased from earlier rates but remained below that of their male contemporaries. This growth corresponded with general trends of increasing coauthorship, suggesting that the recent gains in women's representation do not indicate decreases in gender disparities. Men also were more likely to have sole-authored articles and be lead authors in papers coauthored by men and women. In addition, the vast majority of articles included at least 1 male author, and far fewer included a female giving men a larger visual presence. Gender representation also varied considerably between mainstream/traditional journals and 2 gender-specialized journals.