|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
187022
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
China’s cyber norm-building efforts can be usefully explored based on the concept of the norm life cycle developed by Finnemore and Sikkink. Although China puts cyber sovereignty and government involvement at the core of its cyber governance approach, its Internet policies are a result of interactions between state agencies and business units, and recent reforms suggest greater involvement of Chinese companies. Moreover, many countries, including some from the West, have placed increasing emphasis on intergovernmental involvement and data sovereignty when developing their Internet policies. The EU, for instance, believes that digital sovereignty is necessary to protect its own market from US and Chinese technology giants. Despite the fundamental differences between Brussels's digital sovereignty and Beijing’s cyber sovereignty, the dichotomy between China’s sovereignty-oriented approach and the more open approach of Western countries is more blurred than it may appear, leading to Western countries, the EU in particular, potentially becoming more receptive to China’s cyber norms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
187026
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
An analysis of the Chinese military-civil fusion strategy through a neoclassical realist and state action theory perspective highlights that the advent of emerging technologies has opened up an unprecedented opportunity for states to amplify the extraction and mobilisation of resources, conducive to maintaining and increasing their military and economic power in global politics. Underpinned by increasing cooperation between the People’s Liberation Army and private companies as well as state-owned enterprises, the Chinese military-civil fusion strategy can be viewed as a comprehensive strategy of mobilisation and extraction (actively relying on state-driven technology advancement) that has especially drawn upon technology transfer and talent recruitment from abroad. In this regard, China has acted in line with the premises of state action theory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
187021
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The power shift from West to East has engendered an increasingly confrontational and competitive multipolar system in cyberspace governance. The West has to confront the real possibility of its decline in the face of the rising influence of the non-Western world, as shown in the intensive discussions over ‘Westlessness’ at the 2020 Munich Security Conference. In order to address scholarly concerns around cyberspace governance in a digitalised world, this Special Core examines competing ideas and norms of cyberspace governance from comparative perspectives, shedding light on the promising research field of global cyberspace governance and the debate on ‘Westlessness’ in the study of international politics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
187024
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In order to better capture the dynamics of global cyber governance, it is important to go beyond the established West vs. non-West dichotomy in the scholarly literature and thus develop a more nuanced understanding of the variations of cyber governance norms and approaches within and beyond the traditional Western camp, as well as to take into account the role of regional organisations in reshaping the normative framework of cyber governance. Indeed, the European Union is emerging as a new norm entrepreneur and autonomous regional actor in cyber governance by proactively projecting its regulatory and normative power in the digital sphere. In contrast, the development of ASEAN’s cyber governance norms is a process of norm subsidiarity based on ASEAN’s unique diplomatic culture and normative structure characterised by the ASEAN Way and the principle of ASEAN centrality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
187027
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
How is EU democracy promotion made compatible with European colonial powers’ recent history of quashing democratic and human rights? A discourse analysis of general programmatic EU statements and texts related to selected salient historic junctures – the Algerian Hirak, the 2018 Democratic Republic of Congo elections and the Arab Uprisings – reveals that EU policy-makers reconcile the colonial past and the democracy-promoting present mostly through a silencing of colonialism. The consequence is that colonial-time hierarchical discourses are left undisturbed. Moreover, the projection of peace, democracy and the rule of law becomes not only the oft-noted break with the past, but also a continuity with colonial discourses of Europeans as ‘democratic’, ‘humanitarian’ and ‘civilised’.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
187025
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The intertwinement between innovation, the expansion of digital technologies and insecurity has contributed to the surfacing of concerns related to the development of cyber capacities and capabilities, that is, having the means to respond to cyber insecurity through the mobilisation of technological, human, strategic and economic resources. While some scholars have engaged critically with the concept of ‘cyber capacities’, most of the literature remains associated with the consolidation of a positive agenda on the topic. Drawing on literature from International Relations, international political economy and development studies, an analysis is offered of the formation of an international development agenda for cybersecurity, looking specifically at the consequences of the articulation of the concept of cyber capacities (what is necessary, acceptable, desirable and innovative in responding to cyber threats) as a key driver for setting particular visions for what ‘being capable’ and ‘developed’ is. This also contributes to a critical assessment of the inequalities and power asymmetries embedded in such development projects, with a particular focus on Global South countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
187023
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Global cyber governance is characterised by a West vs. non-West paradigm that glosses over a significant body of states that exhibit more nuanced positions. Such dichotomy has gained greater traction in the midst of geopolitical tensions between the United States on the one hand and China and Russia on the other. Examining the roles and limitations of middle powers, such as Singapore and South Korea, in their efforts to shape global cyber governance allows moving beyond the West vs. non-West paradigm. By employing a range of middle-power behaviours, Singapore and South Korea have been able to carve out a unique role as middle powers and, to some extent, shape the arena in which debates on global cyber governance take place, although not without constraints.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
187028
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Diplomatic relations between Caribbean and African countries are a driving force behind their respective contributions to the conduct of international politics, as the past decade-plus of little-known Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS)-Moroccan relations attests. An analysis of the latter sheds new light on two, interlinked sets of dynamics. First, there is an interplay between those enhanced relations and OECS members’ status-seeking behaviour – through recognition as pro-Rabat, Western Sahara agenda influencers – in a hierarchical system of sovereign states. Second, having regard to the subsequent benefits, the OECS bloc is taking a hard-nosed approach to aligning itself with and diplomatically backing Rabat, which could conflict with some long-established foreign policy tenets of these states.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|