图片911色色色
期刊简介
图片
《欧洲海皮毛干杂志》（European Journal of International Relations）庸碌地代表了已在欧洲发展的海皮毛干领域。自1995年创刊以来，该杂志已成为海皮毛干学界一个迫切而独处的声息。它以其欧洲发源为基础，经过二十多年的发展，已成为海皮毛干界最好后果的缩影，包括前沿的表面申辩、现代和夙昔的学术热门以及表面丰富的实证分析。
本期目次
1
说念德地位——东说念主类地位？探讨大规模暴力事件中说念德与非东说念主化之间的沟通
Moral status – human status? Interrogating the connection between morality and dehumanisation during mass violence
2
群众非正义和施行不安全的产生
Global injustice and the production of ontological insecurity
3
转型性方针？性别内行与技艺官僚的和平
Transformative indicators? Gender expertise and technocratic peace
4
探讨聚拢国维和行径对东说念国对外事务的影响
Exploring the impact of United Nations peacekeeping operations on the external affairs of host states
5
西方对中国海外基础要津融资的替代决策为何失败
女同pornWhy the West’s alternative to China’s international infrastructure financing is failing
6
成员国退出何时会导致海外组织的沦陷？
When do member state withdrawals lead to the death of international organizations?
内容摘抄
说念德地位——东说念主类地位？探讨大规模暴力事件中说念德与非东说念主化之间的沟通
题目：Moral status – human status? Interrogating the connection between morality and dehumanisation during mass violence
作家简介：Torsten Michel，布里斯托大学海皮毛干高等讲师。主要询查酷好酷好在于海皮毛干（元）表面和大规模暴力的政事与伦理，尤其存眷冲突期间和冲突后信任的作用，以及非东说念主化的意见过火在大规模暴行中的性质和功能。
摘抄：从20世纪70年代的早期询查启动，非东说念主化迟缓成为通晓大规模暴行发生的基本能源和条目的一个迫切特征。长久以来，一种广为摄取的主导不雅点觉得，说念德地位的丧失长短东说念主化经由中的重要组成因素，觉得受害者被拔除在义务的说念德范围以外，破裂了说念德壁垒，从而使得某些诬害容貌突破了东说念主类群体中既有的暴力模范。本文以大屠杀这一典型案例为参照，批判性地质疑了迄今为止将丧失说念德地位等同于非东说念主化这一禁绝置疑的不雅点。总体而言，本文主张对非东说念主化的模范性使用和分析性使用进行更良好的区分，需要对其教养性容许和有关性进行更防护的反想，并对其意见基础进行更为批判的探讨。这么作念不仅大致鼓励非东说念主化询查高出现时的景况，还能使咱们大致更潜入地评估其在大规模暴力事件中的用途、意旨过火迫切性。
Beginning with early studies in the 1970s， dehumanisation has become a key feature in attempts to grasp the fundamental dynamics and conditions under which mass atrocities emerge. One of the most long-standing， prominent and widely accepted conceptions sees the loss of moral status as a key constitutive component of processes of dehumanisation， suggesting that the victims’ exclusion from the moral universe of obligation breaks down moral barriers， enabling forms of persecution outside the established practices of violence among human communities. With reference to the paradigmatic case of the Holocaust， this article critically interrogates this so far unquestioned equation of a loss of moral standing with dehumanisation. Overall， it argues for a much more nuanced differentiation between normative and analytical uses of dehumanisation， the need for more detailed reflections on its empirical appearances and relevance， and a more critical engagement with its conceptual grounding. Doing so will lead dehumanisation research beyond its current state and would allow for a more intricate assessment of its uses， meanings and relevance in cases of mass violence.
群众非正义与施行不安全的产生
题目：Global injustice and the production of ontological insecurity
作家简介：Adam B. Lerner，马萨诸塞大学洛厄尔分校政事学副教学。
摘抄：本文淡薄，从头存眷占主导地位的海外老例怎样产生施行层面上的不安全，有助于将施行安全询查（OSS）更好大地向天下政事中的不公说念，相称是当它在多个层面上影响结构边际化的政事行径者时。本询查将伊里斯-马里恩·扬（Iris Marion Young）的询查后果，相称是她对于正义是摒除总揽和压迫的表面引入施行安全询查，从而淡薄了这一论点。本文鉴戒杨的“压迫的五面性”表面，觉得海外体系中无数存在的多重非正义应被通晓为海外体系中施行不安全的主要开端，它们不仅奏凯减轻身份的踏实性，还潦倒了处于缺欠的行径体追求施行安全的实践。在海外层面，这些经由高出单一分析头绪，以不同的模式影响着个东说念主、社会群体以致国度。将扬的表面纳入施行安全询查，不仅有助于在政事表面和海皮毛干这两个不息辰离的子学科之间配置迫切沟通，还能为学者提供更潜入的表面框架，探讨海外体系非正义怎样频频导致施行不安全。著述临了淡薄，施行安全询查应进行模范性转向，想考群众正义是否应被视为多个共存行径体寻求施行安全的前提条目。
This article argues that a renewed focus on how dominant international practices produce ontological insecurity can help better orient ontological security studies (OSS) to injustice in world politics， particularly as it affects structurally marginalized political actors at multiple levels. It makes this case by bringing the work of Iris Marion Young to bear on OSS， particularly her theory of justice as the elimination of domination and oppression. Drawing on Young’s “Five Faces of Oppression，” this paper argues that multiple injustices endemic to the international system should be understood as key producers of ontological insecurity in the international system， both in their direct ability to destabilize identities and in their undermining of disadvantaged actors’ ontological security-seeking practices. On international scales， these processes transcend levels of analysis， affecting individuals， social groups， and even states in differing ways. Incorporating Young’s work into OSS not only helps build a vital bridge between the oft estranged sub-disciplines of political theory and IR， but also can provide scholars a means of better theorizing how ontological insecurity is so often a product of the international system’s injustices. The paper thus concludes by proposing a normative turn within OSS， asking whether global justice should be understood as a precondition for ontological security-seeking among multiple co-existing actors.
转型性方针？性别内行与技艺官僚的和平
题目：Transformative indicators? Gender expertise and technocratic peace
作家简介：Laura McLeod，英国曼彻斯特大学海外政事学高等讲师。她的询查包括性别、女权办法、安全以及冲突后的和平配置。
摘抄：在夙昔十年中，使用方针来跟踪海外和平配置和维和名目、政策与实践的奉行情况日益无数。很多学者品评这些方针具有技艺官僚化、门径化及殖民化的效应。但是，本文从不同的角度进行探讨：方针能带来变革吗？现代对方针的品评泛泛将其视为舒适、去情境化的官僚用具，忽视了拓荒、使用和颠覆方针的东说念主类主体的复杂性。本文将方针界说为一种强有劲的性别化学问坐褥技艺，既可被轨制行径体拓荒、使用，也可被他们颠覆。本文通过对轨制行径体的访谈以及聚拢国通知长讲述的分析，探究了26个方针之一的发展经由，该方针用于忖度聚拢国“妇女、和平与安全”（WPS）议程的奉行情况。所询查的方针跟踪了聚拢国维和与相称政事任务中聘任高等性别内行的数目。2010年至2020年间，围绕这一方针的施展、妙技和所在的讲述揭示了聚拢国中提倡变革的女性办法者所采纳的策略和收拢的契机，鼓励了WPS议程的潜入奉行。尽管方针有固化新开脱办法模范的风险，但忽视其拓荒、使用或颠覆方面的后劲无疑是一种舒适，戒指了达成实质性变革的契机。
In the last decade， the use of indicators to track implementation of international peacebuilding and peacekeeping programmes， policies and practices has proliferated. Indicators are criticised by many scholars for their technocratic， standardised and colonialising effects. This article follows a different line of inquiry. Can indicators be transformative? Contemporary critiques place indicators as bureaucratic artefacts in a vacuum， detached and decontextualised from the nuances of human agency developing， utilising and subverting them. I conceptualise indicators as powerful gendered technologies of knowledge creation developed， used and subverted by institutional actors. Using interviews with institutional actors and United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Reports， I trace institutional stories of one indicator (out of 26) developed to capture implementation of the UN Women， Peace and Security (WPS) agenda. The indicator investigated tracks the number of senior gender experts employed within UN Peacekeeping and Special Political Missions. Stories of progress， skill， and location in the reporting of this indicator between 2010 and 2020 highlight strategies deployed and opportunities taken by feminist-change advocates within the UN to prompt a deeper implementation of the WPS agenda. While indicators hold the danger of reinforcing neoliberal norms， the failure to conceptualise the potential for developing， utilising and/or subverting the indicators smacks of hubris， limiting opportunities for meaningful transformation.
探讨聚拢国维和行径对东说念国对外事务的影响
题目：Exploring the impact of United Nations peacekeeping operations on the external affairs of host states
作家简介：Richard Caplan，牛津大学政事与海皮毛干系海皮毛干教学。John Gledhill，牛津大学海外发展系群众治理副教学。Maline Meiske，牛津大学政事与海皮毛干系博士后询查员。
摘抄：聚拢国（UN）维和行径（PKOs）的询查泛泛很少存眷东说念国发展的一个迫切方面——对外事务。本文聚焦于冷战后时期的聚拢国维和行径，旨在探讨聚拢国维和行径怎样影响东说念国的对外事务。咱们通过对聚拢国维和行径重要文献的定量内容分析，详情了聚拢国存眷的东说念国对外事务的具体方面。接着，本文淡薄一个意见框架，折柳出维和行径对东说念国对外事务相称具影响力的三个领域：相干构建、轨制与酬酢智商配置以及政策制定。咱们识别了维和行径影响东说念国对外事务的三条旅途：授权变装、自主行径以及不测后果。结合文献分析和原创访谈数据，本文以东帝汶和利比里亚这两个频年来遴荐过大规模聚拢国维和任务的两个国度为例，阐释了该意见框架的施行应用。
Studies of United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operations (PKOs) typically give scant attention to an important aspect of host states’ development: their external affairs. This article identifies ways in which UN PKOs can shape the external affairs of host states， focusing on UN peacekeeping in the post-Cold War period. We present the findings of a quantitative content analysis of key UN peacekeeping documents to establish which aspects of host state external affairs have been of concern to the UN. We then provide a conceptual framework that maps three areas of external affairs in which PKOs are particularly influential: relationship-building; institution- and diplomatic capacity-building; and the shaping of policy in domains of external affairs. We identify three pathways through which PKOs shape the external affairs of host states: mandated roles， improvised actions， and unintended consequences. Drawing on documentary analysis and original interview data， we illustrate our conceptual framework through an exploration of the impact of peacekeeping on the external affairs of two countries that have hosted large-scale UN-led peacekeeping missions in recent decades: Timor-Leste (East Timor) and Liberia.
西方对中国海外基础要津融资的替代决策为何失败
题目：Why the West’s alternative to China’s international infrastructure financing is failing
作家简介：Shahar Hameiri，昆士兰大学政事学与海皮毛干学院的海外政事学教学，澳大利亚询查理事会将来询查员，他的主要询查东亚和太平洋地区的安全与发展问题。Lee Jones，伦敦玛丽女王大学政事经济学与海皮毛干教学。他的询查重心是政事经济、安全、治理、主权和烦嚣，尤其是在东亚。
摘抄：跟着地缘政事竞争加重，西方国度试图与中国的“一带一齐”倡议（BRI）竞争。但是，群众基础要津的资金动员依然不及，标明西方国度难以挑战中国在此领域的主导地位。为什么会这么？通过对中国和好意思国的相比政事经济分析，本文觉得，单靠地缘计策想维的国度管制者无法创造真确的竞争力。国度的上风和缺欠根植于结构性政事经济动态。当国度管制者的联想安妥或反应普遍社会力量过火所掌控的成本和坐褥力的利益时，不息会产生强有劲的影响。这在中国尤其彰着，其倡议主淌若为处理工业多余和成本过度积存问题提供空间和期间上的调度用具。违反，当地缘政事抱负与势力集团的利益和物资现实脱节时，效果不息乏善可陈。这少量适用于好意思国，其秉性是基础要津老化、工业空腹化以及占主导地位的金融部门对基础要津基本不感酷好酷好。尽管好意思国国度管制者已转向加大对国内基础要津的插足，但在海外上，西方络续遴荐的新开脱办法作念法仍然依赖于动员私东说念主成本参与基础要津投资这一也曾失败的作念法。
As geopolitical rivalry intensifies， Western states have moved to compete with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However， the mobilisation of funds for global infrastructure remains paltry， suggesting that Western states cannot contest Chinese dominance here. Why? Through comparative political economy analysis of China and the United States， we argue that serious competition cannot be willed into being by state managers thinking geostrategically. States’ strengths and weaknesses are rooted in structural political economy dynamics. Where state managers’ plans jibe with， or express， the interests of powerful social forces and the capital and productive forces they command， a powerful impact results. This is true of China， whose BRI is principally a spatio-temporal fix for industrial overcapacity and over-accumulated capital. Conversely， where geopolitical ambitions are divorced from powerful groups’ interests and material realities， results are lacklustre. This applies to the United States， characterised by infrastructural decay， industrial hollowing-out and a dominant financial sector largely disinterested in infrastructure. Although US state managers are turning towards increased state spending on domestic infrastructure， internationally， the West’s continued neoliberal approach still relies on the already-failed approach of mobilising private capital into infrastructure investment.
成员国退出何时会导致海外组织的沦陷？
题目：When do member state withdrawals lead to the death of international organizations?
作家简介：Inken von Borzyskowski，牛津大学海皮毛干学教学。她的询查侧重于海皮毛干的国内务治，重心是海外组织过火对国内冲突和选举的影响。Felicity Vabulas，佩珀代因大学海外询查副教学。她的询查重心是海外组织的政事经济学和异邦游说。
摘抄：
近来的询查存眷到列国对海外组织（IOs）的反弹，包括成员国退出是否会影响海外组织的存续。因此，咱们淡薄问题：成员国退出何时会导致海外组织的沦陷？咱们对退出与海外组织沦陷之间存在无数关联捏怀疑魄力，因为泛泛单个成员国并非海外组织活命的重要。此外，退出不息是由于个别成员国的偏好与其他成员产生不合，这些留存成员可能在退出后聚拢在一皆，从而确保以致延迟海外组织的存续。即使是多个国度的退出，也偶然导致海外组织的沦陷，因为一个较小的成员团体可能更易克服集体行径的挑战。但是，迫切成员的退出可能会因资源、市集影响力和招引的缺失而影响组织的存续。咱们愚弄活命模子，对1909至2014/2020年期间532个海外组织的退出数据进行测试，并通过案例分析评释其动态。放胆扶助咱们的不雅点：退出总体上并不导致海外组织的沦陷，但首创成员的退出可能加快其沦陷。风趣的是，经济实力较强的国度的退出似乎有助于海外组织的存续（泛泛通过翻新和/或从头加入达成）。这些发现存助于更好地通晓海外组织的人命周期，以及海外结合的韧性和脆弱性。
Recent research has drawn attention to states’ backlash against international organizations (IOs)， including whether member state withdrawals affect the longevity of IOs. We therefore ask when do member state withdrawals lead to the death of IOs? We are skeptical of a general link between withdrawal and IO death because on average， any one member is not critical for the survival of an IO. Also， withdrawal is often driven by one member state’s preferences diverging from remaining members; these remaining states may band together after withdrawal， ensuring or even enhancing the longevity of the IO. Even withdrawal by several states may not contribute to IO death because a smaller group of remaining members may better overcome collective action challenges. Nonetheless， exit by an important member may affect IO survival by removing resources， market power， and guidance. We test these arguments using survival models on an original dataset of withdrawals across 532 IOs from 1909 to 2014/2020 and illustrate the dynamics with case vignettes. The results support our arguments: withdrawals in general do not lead to IO death but the withdrawal of founding members can speed IO death. Interestingly， withdrawal by economically powerful states seems to facilitate IO survival (often through reform and/or re-entry). These findings contribute to a better understanding of the lifecycle of IOs as well as to the resilience and vulnerabilities of international cooperation.
编译 | 束任翔
审校 | 张潇文
排版 | 杨语灵
本文源于《欧洲海皮毛干杂志》（EJIR） Vol. 30， No. 3， 2024，本文为公益共享，干事于科研教学，不代表本平台不雅点。如有败坏911色色色，迎接指正。
本站仅提供存储干事，通盘内容均由用户发布，如发现存害或侵权内容，请点击举报。