| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
178655
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article proposes Stephen Jay Gould’s concepts of time’s arrow and time’s cycle as a conceptual tool to analyse NATO’s burden-sharing disputes. It argues that the controversies on burden-sharing in NATO can be assessed in terms of their cyclic or arrow kind nature, rendering some disputes more likely to recur than others and providing different kinds of starting points for their forecasting. The study identifies four cyclic categories in which burden-sharing has transformed into a political debate among NATO members during the post-Cold War era: geopolitical change related to Russia; periods of US foreign political retrenchment or renewal; the passivity or activism of European NATO members; and during NATO or allied out-of-area operations. Moreover, the study suggests an arrow kind of direction in burden-sharing disputes, indicating an expansion of disputes to cover comprehensive security, resilience, security co-operation and diplomacy, and to engulf also NATO partner countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
097068
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper employs bibliometric methods to map the structure of conflict research. Citation information is restructured by means of cluster and network analyses for the purpose of identifying the different discourses and fields contributing to conflict research. The data are derived from more than 1,300 articles published in 40 high-quality journals between 2000 and 2006. Four main discourses are identified within the field, and it is concluded that Democratic Peace Theory constitutes a powerful discursive core of contemporary conflict research, affecting most other discourses as well. It is suggested that instead of systemic foci, contemporary conflict research is dominated by the investigation of dyadic forms of interaction and that, somewhat surprisingly, the substantive focus of the most frequently cited research has remained on interstate war. The study intends to help researchers to be sensitive to gaps and focal points in contemporary research, and promote further discussion about the current state of the field. Applied approach provides academics, students, and practitioners with a usable and transparent procedure for structuring discourses and communicating about them further.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
110771
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
One of the key themes in recent discussions about the EU's foreign and security policy has been the question of Europeanization. This article seeks to contribute to this field of research by investigating the way in which a single EU military crisis management operation, the EUFOR Chad/CAR, has been perceived and debated on a national parliamentary arena in two member states, Sweden and Finland. The results suggest that a marked discontinuity prevailed between these nations' policies in the context of the CSDP/ESDP and the discourse on CSDP/ESDP in the respective parliaments. While highlighting the need to pay more attention to the domestic dimension of Europeanization, these findings also call into question some of the basic premises of the discussion on Europeanization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|