Suchergebnisse

Smart power is defined as the effective combination of both hard and soft power. The concept is increasingly used in policy and academic debates, yet a clear understanding of what it actually means is still lacking. As a result, there is little serious consideration of how smart power can contribute to long-standing debates about power in international relations. This article seeks to clarify the meaning of smart power through first analyzing its main components -- hard and soft power -- separately; and second bringing these components together to re-conceptualize smart power. The aim is to make smart power more analytically useful, and to outline the various ways in which hard and soft power can be combined effectively. The author considers the case of Europe to argue that it is mainly a soft power and sometimes a smart power. Adapted from the source document.

International Cooperation Against All Odds: The Ultrasocial World recasts how we understand international relations through an examination of how the human evolutionary predisposition to be "ultrasocial" as a species impacts which political ideas succeed, transform, manipulate, and inspire on a global scale.

This volume recasts how we understand international relations through an examination of how the human evolutionary predisposition to be 'ultrasocial' as a species impacts which political ideas succeed, transform, manipulate, and inspire on a global scale. At a time when pessimism about our current world order is at an all-time high, this book overturns widespread assumptions that international relations is mainly about conflict, power, and national self-interest.

The Politics of Crisis in Europe explores the resilience of the European Union in the face of repeated crises perceived to threaten its very existence. While it is often observed after the fact that these crises serve as opportunities for integration, this is the first critical analysis to suggest that we cannot fully understand the nature and severity of these crises without recognising the role of societal reaction to events and the nature of social narratives about crisis, especially those advanced by the media. Through a close examination of the 2003 Iraq crisis, the 2005 constitutional crisis, and the 2010–12 Eurozone crisis, this book identifies a pattern across these episodes, demonstrating how narratives about crises provide the means to openly air underlying societal tensions that would otherwise remain under the surface, impeding further integration.

The Politics of Crisis in Europe explores the resilience of the European Union in the face of repeated crises perceived to threaten its very existence. While it is often observed after the fact that these crises serve as opportunities for integration, this is the first critical analysis to suggest that we cannot fully understand the nature and severity of these crises without recognising the role of societal reaction to events and the nature of social narratives about crisis, especially those advanced by the media. Through a close examination of the 2003 Iraq crisis, the 2005 constitutional crisis, and the 2010–12 Eurozone crisis, this book identifies a pattern across these episodes, demonstrating how narratives about crises provide the means to openly air underlying societal tensions that would otherwise remain under the surface, impeding further integration

At a time when many observers question the EU's ability to achieve integration of any significance, and indeed Europeans themselves appear disillusioned, Mai'a K. Davis Cross argues that the EU has made remarkable advances in security integration, in both its external and internal dimensions. Moreover, internal security integration-such as dealing with terrorism, immigration, cross-border crime, and drug and human trafficking-has made even greater progress with dismantling certain barriers that previously stood at the core of traditional state sovereignty. Such unprecedented collaboration has become possible thanks to knowledge-based transnational networks, or "epistemic communities," of ambassadors, military generals, scientists, and other experts who supersede national governments in the diplomacy of security decision making and are making headway at remarkable speed by virtue of their shared expertise, common culture, professional norms, and frequent meetings. Cross brings together nearly 80 personal interviews and a host of recent government documents over the course of five separate case studies to provide a microsociological account of how governance really works in today's EU and what future role it is likely to play in the international environment. "This is an ambitious work which deals not only with European security and defense but also has much to say about the policy-making process of the EU in general."--Ezra Suleiman, Princeton University

Since the end of World War II, outer space has been an arena in which both high and low politics have played out, and both the US and Europe have been heavily invested. This article examines the case study of space exploration as a window into the evolving nature of the transatlantic relationship. With the US government regularly deprioritizing Europe in its foreign policy and at times taking the transatlantic relationship for granted, the author argues that transnational and non-state actors have played an important role in maintaining the stability of the alliance. In terms of space, this means that the space community—space agencies, private actors, space enthusiasts, engineers, and scientists, among others—often enable transatlantic cooperation despite initial conflictual rhetoric stemming from political leaders. Importantly, while these transnational or non-state actors tend to view space as a peaceful domain for all of humankind, governments and militaries often treat space as the next battlefield. To support this argument, the article considers two major transatlantic space developments: the US's Space Force, which reflects a US desire to be dominant in space, and Europe's Galileo satellite system, which reflects a European goal to have strategic autonomy from the US. The author argues that the idea that space should be a peaceful domain for all of humankind is more strongly reflected in outcomes, despite the presence of conflictual, militaristic rhetoric.

This article analyses the origins and development of the relationship between the European Space Agency (ESA) and the EU space program as separate, but related processes of European integration. For over fifty years the ESA has been separate from the EU institutionally despite having nearly all of the same Member States, and its role in uniting European countries in a common outer space endeavour has been significant. The ESA embraces the motto 'United Space in Europe'. The EU's interest in space has only emerged in the last twenty years, but has grown rapidly. As such, space has become a case of informal (i.e., outside of EU structures) differentiated integration. While it may be easy to assume that the ESA is outside of EU structures because Member States have wanted to keep space policy intergovernmental, the author argues that fundamentally different ideas about the role and use of space between the EU and the ESA have been the main, underlying driver. A long-standing spaceflight idea – mainly, the peaceful use of space for all of humankind – is embedded in the ESA's DNA, while this is not the case for the EU (This article is an output of the EUFLEX project, which has been funded by the Research Council of Norway (project number 287131)).
European Space Agency, EU Space Program, differentiated integration, NASA, spaceflight, ESRO, ELDO

Drawing upon fresh archival research and participant observation, the author traces the emergence and transformative idea of the non-weaponized and peaceful use of space from the 1920s to today. Building on this, the case study questions much of the common wisdom surrounding humans' relationship with space over the past century. Although the beginnings of the Space Age are usually thought to have closely coincided with the Space Race beginning in 1955, the paper goes further back to the Spaceflight Movement of the 1920s and 30s, tracing the emergence of the idea of space as part of the global commons. This societal-level movement was highly transnational and collaborative in nature, and pushed for the achievement of human spaceflight decades before the technology existed, at the same time advocating for space as a peaceful domain for all of humankind. Using a new approach that also provides the basic ontological assumption for Model 3 of the special issue framework, the author argues that the impetus to engage in space exploration was fundamentally 'ultrasocial', defined as a human predisposition to be other-regarding, empathic, and inclined toward seeking wide-scale cooperation, even among strangers.