Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article discusses the future potential of a norm that emerged recently from the academic literature surrounding the ethics of war, and that echoes a number of political and moral viewpoints around the necessity of terminating ongoing and bloody wars that otherwise are unnecessarily prolonged: the norm of 'jus ex bello'. While it argues in favor of a possibilistic approach to norms – in order to argue why norms should develop, it is necessary to analyze whether they could develop – this article finds that jus ex bello might be an appropriate response to some of the arguments in favor of the need for normative change in warfare. However, four major obstacles to this potential innovation are identified, grounded in cultural history, politics, morality and cognition. Based on the further examination of these, the article goes on to make suggestions for institutional design initiatives, in themselves dependent on possible significant social and cultural evolution, that would favor normative change and the development of jus ex bello.

This paper studies the making future claims of security by a large selection of experts in D.C.'s think tanks. Although the future is a shared concern on D.C.'s marketplace of ideas and in think tanks, as knowledge producers, experts appear as 'self-blinded' and produce 'self-blinding prophecies'. This paper studies the language of future claims and the role of think tanks in the production of anticipatory knowledge. It discusses how claims about the future are prioritised and highlights the focal points around which experts converge. It analyses the reasons for such homogeneous thinking lying in the experts' social profiles, in the structure of D.C.'s marketplace and in its norms. The 'future' has two major latent functions. On the one hand, past-oriented thinking helps create surprises when political events break away from the limited sets of issues studied by experts. On the other, the 'future' has integrative functions: it serves as a communication tool for experts that gather around shared horizons of expectation and create a collective web of meaning.

This paper studies the making future claims of security by a large selection of experts in D.C.'s think tanks. Although the future is a shared concern on D.C.'s marketplace of ideas and in think tanks, as knowledge producers, experts appear as 'self-blinded' and produce 'self-blinding prophecies'. This paper studies the language of future claims and the role of think tanks in the production of anticipatory knowledge. It discusses how claims about the future are prioritised and highlights the focal points around which experts converge. It analyses the reasons for such homogeneous thinking lying in the experts' social profiles, in the structure of D.C.'s marketplace and in its norms. The 'future' has two major latent functions. On the one hand, past-oriented thinking helps create surprises when political events break away from the limited sets of issues studied by experts. On the other, the 'future' has integrative functions: it serves as a communication tool for experts that gather around shared horizons of expectation and create a collective web of meaning.

La réputation est à plusieurs titres une dynamique essentielle de l'activité financière. Elle est une dimension fondamentale du rôle des agences de notation. Cet article identifie les rôles multiples que joue la réputation dans le mécanisme de la notation de la solvabilité des États. Il montre que la réputation s'articule autour de trois axes : le principe de surveillance, la fonction d'information et le rôle d'accréditation rempli par les agences. Ces trois dimensions sont historiquement contingentes. La dynamique de l'accréditation est aujourd'hui, parmi ces trois facettes de la réputation financière, celle qui prédomine. L'accréditation fonctionne selon un principe qui privilégie la stabilité et induit des effets temporels. Elle devient, dans ce contexte, un amortisseur temporel et social. Elle a davantage pour rôle de freiner des processus de changement que de provoquer des mutations. La réputation a dès lors un effet circonscrit.

What kind of future worlds do experts of international security envision? This paper studies the role of experts in DC's think tanks, a relatively small world socially and culturally highly homogeneous. It underlines the characteristics of this epistemic community that influence the way its analysts make claims about the future for security. The DC's marketplace of the future lacks diversity. The paradigms analysts use when they study international politics are very similar. Moreover, the range of issues they focus on is also relatively narrow. The paper highlights three main features of the relation between those who make claims about the future of security and those to whom these claims are addressed (mainly policymakers). First, it shows that, for epistemic but also for political reasons, the future imagined in think tanks is relatively stable and linear. This future also contributes to the continuity of political decisions. Second, the paper shows that think tanks are also "victims of groupthink", especially when they make claims about the future. Third, it underlines a paradox: scenarios and predictions create surprises. Claims about the future have a strong tunneling effect. They reinforce preexisting beliefs, create focal points, and operate as blinders when, inevitably, the future breaks away from its linear path. ; Les experts en matière de sécurité sont régulièrement sollicités pour donner leur avis sur le futur de la politique internationale. A Washington, le petit monde des think tanks est un véritable " marché du futur ". Son homogénéité culturelle et sociale est très forte, la diversité des idées qui s'y expriment très réduite. Dans ce marché des idées, le spectre de futurs possibles est dès lors très étroit. On note trois caractéristiques principales de cette énonciation du futur. Premièrement, pour des raisons épistémiques et politiques, le futur est linéaire, et ainsi conforte la stabilité et la continuité des décisions politiques. Deuxièmement, ces savoirs de l'expertise sont fortement ...

What kind of future worlds do experts of international security envision? This paper studies the role of experts in DC's think tanks, a relatively small world socially and culturally highly homogeneous. It underlines the characteristics of this epistemic community that influence the way its analysts make claims about the future for security. The DC's marketplace of the future lacks diversity. The paradigms analysts use when they study international politics are very similar. Moreover, the range of issues they focus on is also relatively narrow. The paper highlights three main features of the relation between those who make claims about the future of security and those to whom these claims are addressed (mainly policymakers). First, it shows that, for epistemic but also for political reasons, the future imagined in think tanks is relatively stable and linear. This future also contributes to the continuity of political decisions. Second, the paper shows that think tanks are also "victims of groupthink", especially when they make claims about the future. Third, it underlines a paradox: scenarios and predictions create surprises. Claims about the future have a strong tunneling effect. They reinforce preexisting beliefs, create focal points, and operate as blinders when, inevitably, the future breaks away from its linear path. ; Les experts en matière de sécurité sont régulièrement sollicités pour donner leur avis sur le futur de la politique internationale. A Washington, le petit monde des think tanks est un véritable " marché du futur ". Son homogénéité culturelle et sociale est très forte, la diversité des idées qui s'y expriment très réduite. Dans ce marché des idées, le spectre de futurs possibles est dès lors très étroit. On note trois caractéristiques principales de cette énonciation du futur. Premièrement, pour des raisons épistémiques et politiques, le futur est linéaire, et ainsi conforte la stabilité et la continuité des décisions politiques. Deuxièmement, ces savoirs de l'expertise sont fortement ...

What kind of future worlds do experts of international security envision? This paper studies the role of experts in DC's think tanks, a relatively small world socially and culturally highly homogeneous. It underlines the characteristics of this epistemic community that influence the way its analysts make claims about the future for security. The DC's marketplace of the future lacks diversity. The paradigms analysts use when they study international politics are very similar. Moreover, the range of issues they focus on is also relatively narrow. The paper highlights three main features of the relation between those who make claims about the future of security and those to whom these claims are addressed (mainly policymakers). First, it shows that, for epistemic but also for political reasons, the future imagined in think tanks is relatively stable and linear. This future also contributes to the continuity of political decisions. Second, the paper shows that think tanks are also "victims of groupthink", especially when they make claims about the future. Third, it underlines a paradox: scenarios and predictions create surprises. Claims about the future have a strong tunneling effect. They reinforce preexisting beliefs, create focal points, and operate as blinders when, inevitably, the future breaks away from its linear path. ; Les experts en matière de sécurité sont régulièrement sollicités pour donner leur avis sur le futur de la politique internationale. A Washington, le petit monde des think tanks est un véritable " marché du futur ". Son homogénéité culturelle et sociale est très forte, la diversité des idées qui s'y expriment très réduite. Dans ce marché des idées, le spectre de futurs possibles est dès lors très étroit. On note trois caractéristiques principales de cette énonciation du futur. Premièrement, pour des raisons épistémiques et politiques, le futur est linéaire, et ainsi conforte la stabilité et la continuité des décisions politiques. Deuxièmement, ces savoirs de l'expertise sont fortement ...

Résumé Critique de la raison gouvernementale, régime de vérité et de la juridification, ces notions foucaldiennes sont éclairantes pour saisir le phénomène de la justification dans les relations internationales. Cet « usage » de Foucault se veut non relativiste ; ces notions éclairent un processus de justification qui repose sur une raison des conséquences et utilitariste qui fait aujourd'hui pleinement sens dans les affaires internationales. Cet article propose de concilier une approche généalogique avec une démarche philosophique abstraite qui pose les termes d'une raison morale.