|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
102351
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this article, I examine the challenges associated with the cooperation
between NATO and nongovernmental organizations in peacebuilding operations.
I argue that those challenges need to be understood as part of
a process of contestation and competition over the redefinition of the
"rules of the game" in the changing domain of peacebuilding. This
process of contestation, I suggest, can significantly undermine NATO's
ability to contribute to sustainable peacebuilding in war-torn countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
060802
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2005.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the practices of governance enacted within the framework of the international administration of Kosovo, which was established in 1999. I analyse the complex interplay between power and the liberal-democratic norms around which the UN-led mission defined its role in the province. The international administration exercised significant power in the legal/institutional reconstruction of the province, and in its systematic attempts to socialise Kosovars into accepting Western-based norms of liberal democracy as the only reasonable foundation of their polity. At the same time, however, the norms advocated by the international administration proved to be the source of a certain degree of power for the people of Kosovo. Specifically, those norms provided the framework within which Kosovars were able to criticise the international administration, and to claim the right to greater participation in decisions regarding the province. Over the past couple of years, Kosovo has witnessed the emergence of a shared normative framework within which the international administrators and Kosovar political elites articulate often competitive truth claims about the problems of the province, and mobilise different forms of power in support of those claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
102348
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This piece introduces the concept of sustainable peacebuilding and briefly
examines the growing involvement of NATO in peacebuilding operations.
It also previews the empirical articles in this special section, explaining how
they advance our understanding of the challenges faced by NATO in its
peacebuilding efforts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
065876
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Stanford, Stanford University Press, 2005.
|
| Description |
x, 357p.
|
| Standard Number |
0804751617
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 050172 | 355.031091821/GHE 050172 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
164365
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
International Relations scholars often assume that NATO represents the institutional expression of a pre-existing, liberal-democratic Western security community. However, far from simply representing a pre-given community, NATO has always been involved in power-filled processes of constructing “the West.” At the heart of those processes lie practices of collective (re)imagining of the Western world, as well as the representation of internal tensions as feuds within a community united by liberal values. Today, the task of managing internal differences has become particularly complicated due to the rise of radical conservative political forces in several allied states. This has translated into an unprecedented clash between liberal and illiberal interpretations of the Western community. This paper also shows that, contrary to conventional wisdom, middle powers have played important roles both in the construction of the liberal Western security community, and, more recently, in articulating an alternative—radical conservative—vision of the West.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
171786
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
These days, when we hear the slogan ‘let's make our country great again’ we almost automatically assume the state concerned is the US, and the leader uttering the slogan is President Trump. This article invites readers to explore the discourse and practices through which another national leader is seeking to restore his country's ‘greatness’ and promote national and international security. The leader concerned is France's Emmanuel Macron. Why focus on the French president? Because since his election he has become the most dynamic European leader, on a mission to enhance France's international stature, and to do so via a broader process of protecting and empowering the EU. More broadly, France stands out as a country whose political leadership has long been committed to the goal of playing a global role. As Pernille Rieker reminds us, ‘Since 1945, French foreign policy has been dominated by the explicit ambition of restoring the country's greatness [la grandeur de la France], justified in terms of French exceptionalism’
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
116130
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article explores the dynamics and implications of practices of protection enacted within the framework of the UN-sponsored International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. It examines the ways in which those practices challenge established categories in the field of security, and discusses the problems and dilemmas they generate. The article demonstrates that the role played by North Atlantic Treaty Organization - as the lead actor in ISAF - reflects the Alliance's reconceptualisation of the relevant space of security. An analysis of security practices employed by ISAF in Afghanistan reveals that, in spite of statements that stress the unique situation of stabilisation and reconstruction in Afghanistan, ISAF's dual emphasis on inclusion/exclusion (i.e. defeating radical Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters while also winning the hearts and minds of the other Afghans) echoes in interesting ways of colonial practices of counter-insurgency. Conceptually, one of the most interesting features of ISAF's security practices has been a blurring of multiple boundaries that have long been at the heart of thinking about international politics: domestic/international, military/policing and public/private actors. By shedding light on that process of blurring boundaries, this article provides further evidence in support of the claim made in this special issue: that we are now living in a world in which many of the distinctions that once appeared to be clearly defined and fairly rigid are fast breaking down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
066873
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|