Co-auteur
  • RAMEL Frédéric (9)
  • REICH Simon (5)
  • CHARILLON Frédéric (5)
  • DOMBROWSKI Peter (4)
  • Voir plus
Type de Document
  • Livre (9)
  • Partie ou chapitre de livre (8)
  • Article (6)
  • Contribution à un site web (5)
  • Voir plus
in La France dans le monde Sous la direction de CHARILLON Frédéric Publié en 2021-02-25
40
vues

0
téléchargements
[résumé de l'ouvrage] Puissance globale ou acteur européen ? Référence culturelle mondiale ou nation oubliée ? Le rang de la France dans le monde, ainsi que sa marge de manœuvre, posent aujourd’hui de nombreuses questions. Les bouleversements géopolitiques récents, comme la montée en puissance de l’Asie, le Brexit ou le développement de populismes illibéraux, impliquent la redéfinition de l’action extérieure de la France. Du couple franco-allemand à l’alliance atlantique, en passant par le rapport aux Suds marqué par l’héritage colonial, c’est toute la relation de la France à ses voisins plus ou moins proches qui est étudiée ici. Les instruments à sa disposition sont aussi passés au crible : l’outil diplomatique, la compétence militaire, bien sûr, mais aussi la promotion de son modèle laïc. Un livre pour mieux comprendre et penser le rôle international de la France, adapté aux temps qui viennent.

in European Review of International Studies Publié en 2020-12-17
ROUSSEAU Elise
34
vues

0
téléchargements
On various occasions, states have condemned other nations or groups for mass atrocities they commit; but this rarely leads to any step to redress the untoward situation. This article therefore asks: What functions does blame serve when the blamers lack – or are reluctant to use – the power or authority to punish transgressors? Unlike approaches that focus on the effects of blaming on the wrongdoer, we argue that openly attributing responsibility for wrongdoings to another state or non-state actor has become a normative strategy to shape the way a government is perceived domestically and abroad. Specifically, international blame serves two main objectives: an immediate, communicative function, that is, to express moral protest, and a future-oriented purpose, that is, to dispel future indictment of complicity. We suggest that a corollary of this normative strategy is to make non-intervention morally acceptable. Thus, while in principle the blamer might stand up for the violated norm and value the victims, the strategic use of blame tends to legitimate inaction, by diverting attention away from blaming’s deontic commitments. The article therefore warns against the instrumental use of blame as an act of supererogation (that is, an act that is not compulsory but whose performance is praiseworthy), and as a form of moral clearance (whereby the blamer acknowledges the issue but leaves responsibility for finding solution to the international society). Rather, while blaming ascribes responsibility for the act to an agent, we argue, it also puts the blamer in a specific moral situation: the necessity to take measures that interrupt the unfolding action. Our analysis leads us to put forward a plausible norm that broadens the scope of complicity in international politics: states become complicit in the wrongdoing of other actors (states or non-states) whenever they violate moral obligations that blaming demands. In other words, to blame is to commit oneself to act, though the exact nature of this action varies.

Kick-off conference of DATAWAR Project -- Unlike many other projects currently funded to improve the understanding and prevention of political conflict and violence, this project does not aim at using data to develop and test yet another large-n statistical model. Instead, we will examine the ways in which scholars themselves produce and analyse ‘big data’, and how this may modify perceptions and interpretations of conflicts by practitioners and media actors. This ambition responds to the widespread calls for more reflexivity on the often-overseen biases and potential side-effects of data-driven and algorithm-based analysis of human behaviour. The central contribution of the project will be to provide the first in-depth analysis of scientific practices of quantitative conflict studies and their impact on practitioner perceptions. The project will deliver thoroughly empirically grounded insights into the ways in which data shape and potentially disturb perceptions of war. This will not only provide an essential contribution to the emerging scholarship problematizing the links between big data and security policy. It will also help to stimulate policy decisions on targeted funding for social science research by identifying gaps and biases in current quantitative research practices.

in Ideologies in World Politics Sous la direction de GIESEN Klaus-Gerd Publié en 2020-09-15
56
vues

0
téléchargements
This essay examines both the epistemological underpinnings and implications of ideology in international security. It does so with an eye toward assessing the benefits of a constitutive approach, as compared to a causal perspective that understands ideology as falling within a causal-effect cognitive process. We then put our theoretical argument to work by studying neoconservatism’s influence on US foreign policy under George W. Bush. This case allows us to disclose competition between ideologies, understand the role of ideology in the process of decision-making and vet the extent to which ideology acts on policy choices. The essay advocates a social theory of ideology that can tap into the moral stances that shape discussions about ideology in international security.

in The Hague journal of diplomacy Publié en 2020-04
66
vues

0
téléchargements
This essay argues that the work of ministries of foreign affairs (MFAs) centres on three modes of articulation; namely, intersubjective, practical and material articulations. However, much research in diplomatic studies has yet to come to terms with the specific ways in which these modes of articulation coalesce to produce a distinctive foreign policy. I suggest that a field theory account of MFAs offers a reliable set of tools that enables us to understand how a foreign policy takes shape, the dynamics that sustain it and the circumstances under which it is likely to change. Because a field’s existence is often derived from its relational consequences, the essay clarifies the link between a field and its effects, using the concept of ‘affordance’. In this sense, theorising MFAs connects a philosophy of action — which focuses on the field theory’s concepts — and a philosophy of science — which emphasises relations within and between different modes of articulation.

Sous la direction de BALZACQ Thierry, CHARILLON Frédéric, RAMEL Frédéric Publié en 2020-01 Collection The Sciences Po Series in International Relations and Political Economy
182
vues

0
téléchargements
This volume brings together different approaches to diplomacy both as an institution and a practice. The authors examine diplomacy from their own backgrounds and through sociological traditions, which shape the study of international relations (IR) in Francophone countries. The volume’s global character articulates the Francophone intellectual concerns with a variety of scholarships on diplomacy, providing a first contact with this subfield of IR for students and practitioners.

45
vues

0
téléchargements
Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) surveys are important indicators for tapping into the evolution of International Relations worldwide. TRIP reached France in 2011 and has been conducted three times since then in 2011 and 2014. Previous studies led to two articles, respectively in Revue Française de Science Politique (Cornut and Battistella, 2013) in 2013 and in Critique Internationale in 2017 (Balzacq, Cornut and Ramel, 2017). This essay provides an analysis of the third iteration of the survey’s results. It builds upon the previous research on this topic and identifies the global trends and the specificities of this year’s edition. Specifically, the first two articles shed light on what could be considered as French characteristics of International Relations as a discipline, with a growing attention on how French scholarship was being integrated within the “Global” field of International Relations...

73
vues

0
téléchargements
What is grand strategy? Do states have the monopoly of grand strategy? Can all states develop and claim to have a grand strategy? What can a comparative study of grand strategy bring to an understanding of global politics? Thierry Balzacq , Simon Reich and Peter Dombrowski examine these questions and many more in a coedited volume promoting a novel approach to the concept of grand strategy, Comparing Grand Strategy: A Framework and Cases (Oxford University Press, 2019). Interview with Thierry Balzacq and Simon Reich. Interview by Miriam Perier, CERI

148
vues

0
téléchargements
This contribution to the symposium examines tensions holding back the development of securitization theory and proposed potential avenues to transcend and resolve them. Specifically, it argues that the evolution of securitization has been shaped by two main debates: one between those who hold that securitization is decided by the elite and those who hold that it is co-constructed by the elite and target audiences; and a second debate between scholars who treat securitization as de-politicization and researchers who argue that securitization cannot be severed from politics. While these debates have been acknowledged in the literature, they are seldom if ever addressed. This article examines the roots of these tensions, showing how they have undermined the coherence of the theory. It then introduces the concept of a regime of practices as a promising solution, arguing that it better accounts for how security issues emerge and acquire their legitimacy, which provides them with a social stickiness. Further, the article shows that both moments of creation and transformation of regimes of practices involve a specific kind of politics (the politics of the extraordinary), wherein ideas, principles, and aims of the community are said to be vitally at stake.

in Security Studies Publié en 2019-09
DOMBROWSKI Peter
REICH Simon
66
vues

0
téléchargements
The literature on grand strategy is dynamic and voluminous. Yet a vital set of questions remains unsettled. There is little agreement on such basic issues as a common definition of grand strategy, the appropriate methods that should be employed in studying it, which countries qualify as comparative cases, and whether the purpose of research is explanatory or prescriptive. This article examines four recent, important books as a platform for addressing these issues and argues that, as currently constituted, grand strategy is a field of study rather than a mature research program. It concludes by offering a modest range of options that can be employed to rectify these problems and develop a comparative grand strategy program.

Suivant