Suchergebnisse

Abstract
NATO's involvement in Kosovo and its transformation from a military intervention to a UN-authorized peacekeeping operation has played a key role in the evolution of the alliance's strategic and political agenda. This article explores the importance of NATO's engagement with Kosovo in retrospect and in relation to the future outlook for European and global peace and security. It focuses on the centrality of this case for NATO's post-Cold War identity and as a key issue in the renewed political conflict associated with the transitional international order. We make three arguments. First, we argue that NATO's involvement in Kosovo has shaped and exacerbated the broader friction associated with the shifting international order. Second, we make the case that this engagement has played a key role in the strategic, political and operational development of NATO and its evolving identity. Thirdly, as a result of this, we argue that NATO's evolution and transformation in Kosovo was guided by what we call the logic of successful security practices. This entails making prudent political choices and implementing practical steps to harmonize divergent strategic interests among NATO members, adapting to shifting security circumstances, and upholding the organization's significance, credibility and influence both within and beyond the Euro-Atlantic community.

This article explores the European Union's (EU) practices of international state recognition in a transitional international order. It illustrates the difficulties that the EU has encountered in attempting to reach a collective position on sensitive cases of recognition – through a complex balance of internal and external considerations – at a time when the norms regarding recognition are increasingly under challenge. Whether the organisation takes a collective European position on recognition or allows its members to adopt individual national positions, acute inconsistencies and tensions have been exposed, with implications for the EU's standing in the world. Through this, the article identifies a key tension between the EU's normative commitments and its geopolitical interests. In conclusion, the article argues that while a uniform EU policy on recognition may not be feasible and case-by-case pragmatism will likely continue, a more coherent approach and greater understanding of the impact of the EU's position on recognition are necessary. The article draws upon interview material and extensive analysis of official EU documentation in order to provide new insights into this complex challenge. By exploring the intricacies of recognition politics, the article also makes an empirical contribution to understanding the practice of international relations in this area.

This article explores the policies and activities undertaken by Kosovo as it seeks diplomatic recognition under conditions of contested statehood and transitional international order. Existing debates about diplomatic recognition—in particular, how independent sovereign statehood is achieved—generally rest upon systemic factors, normative institutions, and the preferences of great powers. In contrast, we argue that the experience of Kosovo presents a more complex and less predetermined process of international recognition, in which the agency of fledgling states, diplomatic skill, timing, and even chance may play a far more important role in mobilizing international support for recognition than is generally acknowledged. In building this argument, we explore Kosovo's path to contested independence and examine the complex process of diplomatic recognition, as well as highlight the hybrid justifications for recognizing Kosovo's statehood and independence. Without downplaying the importance of systemic factors, this article contributes to a critical rethinking of norms and processes related to state recognition in international affairs, which has implications for a broad range of cases.

AbstractJulian Bergmann and Arne Niemann claim that 'neo‐functional peace' was insufficiently conceptualized and empirically unsubstantiated. They draw on the original neo‐functionalist literature to propose a logic of spillover to explain the European Union's external policies. We argue that our original article is not damaged by this critique and its explanation of the EU's approach in the Serbia‐Kosovo case stands. We accept the need for further work, based on analysis of different examples and sectors, which can clarify the conceptual boundaries of neo‐functional peace and test it against other cases.

The European Union has expanded its role in preventing conflicts and building peace, but its insti-tutional practices remain insufficiently conceptualized. This article argues that, drawing from astrong self-perception toward a neo-functionalist interpretation of its own history, the EU uses'neo-functio nal peace' as an approach for resolving protracted disputes, through deconstructinghighly political issues into technical meanings in order to achieve mutually acceptable agreements.This article explores the EU's efforts to normalize relations between Kosovo and Serbia, andexamines the reliance on aspects of neo-functionalism for building peace after protracted disputes.We argue that neo-functional peace has played a crucial role in normalizing political relations andreconciling some of the outstanding disputes between Kosovo and Serbia. Building on this casestudy, we suggest a theoretical concept of neo-functional peace as a useful means to conceptualizethe EU's peace support practices.