Suchergebnisse

1. Introduction -- 2. Crisis, Anxiety and Ontological Insecurity -- 3. The Construction of Kosovo as Serbia's Ontic Space -- 4. Disintegration of Yugoslavia and Serbia's Anxiety over Kosovo -- 5. Critical Situation: Kosovo's Declaration of Independence -- 6. Dissonance and Avoidance: Serbia's Quest for a New Normal -- 7. Conclusion

What is the role of memories for the expansion of international society? By drawing on the English School approach to International Relations this edited volume argues that the memories of empire and suzerainty are key to understanding sociological aspects of the expansion of anarchical society. The expert contributors adopt a socio-historic conceptualization of entry into international society, aiming to move beyond the legalist analysis, and also explore the impact of identity-constructions and collective memories on the expansion of international society. Empirically, the volume investigates the entry into international society of Belarus, Bulgaria, Greece, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia and Romania and studies memories that they activated along the way. While these memoires of bygone polities were used by state builders to make sense of international society and legitimise claims of the new entrants, they inadvertently also generated tensions and anxieties, which in many ways persist until this day. Both the theoretical angle and the empirical material presented in this volume are novel additions to the growing body of knowledge in historical International Relations. Exploring how memories and experiences of the past still complicate the entrants' positions in international society and to what degree ensuing tensions remain today, this volume will be of interest to students and scholars of European International Relations, particularly those with a focus on Eastern Europe. --

Ontological security scholarship in International Relations (IR) has predominantly focused on the importance of social environments for the healthy sense of self. However, material environments can also provide an important source of ontological security. In my previous work I have argued that to assume this role of 'ontic spaces' material environments need to be discursively linked to states' self-identity either through projection or introjection. In this article, I draw on the work of Julia Kristeva to argue that ontic spaces can also come about through abjection or the rejection of a material environment from the narrative of the self. I illustrate this theoretical point in the case study of the Serbian Orthodox Church of Christ the Saviour in Pristina. Its construction began in 1992 during the rule of Slobodan Milošević but was never finished due to the Kosovo war in 1998/9. Over the years, as all proposed changes are considered to be a threat to a healthy sense of self of either Serbs or Albanians, the building has been turned into an abjected ontic space, an ambiguous symbol undermining the self/other and victim/oppressor boundaries and as such both repels and attracts, threatens and protects.

The central premise of ontological security theory is that states are ready to compromise their physical security and other important material gains in order to protect their ontological security. While the existing studies have primarily focused on how states defend or maintain their ontological security, little attention has been paid to critical situations that make states ontologically insecure in the first place. Drawing on the work of Anthony Giddens, I conceptualise critical situations in world politics as radical disjunctions that challenge the ability of collective actors to 'go on' by bringing into the realm of discursive consciousness four fundamental questions related to existence, finitude, relations and autobiography. The argument is illustrated in a case study of ontological insecurity produced in Serbia by the secession of Kosovo.

One of the core principles of EU interventions under the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) has been local ownership. While the EU takes pride in fully respecting this principle, the existing research suggests that the implementation has been far from smooth. However, we still know very little how this principle is conceptualised and operationalised, let alone why its implementation has been so difficult. Drawing on document analysis and 27 in-depth interviews, the article makes 3 arguments. First, ownership is increasingly construed in the EU policy rhetoric as a middle ground between imposition and restraint. Second, in practice, ownership is operationalised as an externally driven, top-down endeavour, resulting in the low degree of local participation. Third, in addition to the obstacles normally faced by other peace-builders, the EU's efforts to implement ownership are constrained by the politics and policy-making of CSDP. The arguments are illustrated in a case study of the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of (EUCAP Nestor).

Since its publication three decades ago, Hedley Bull and Adam Watson's The Expansion of International Society has served as the main point of departure for historically informed discussion of how today's states system emerged and then went on to envelop the world. In a recent article, Iver Neumann criticized Bull and Watson's conceptualization for being Euro-centric, in the sense that these scholars only ascribed agency to the European side of the relationship between an entrant and international society. For International Relations, it is particularly apposite that the new entrants to international society themselves came from suzerain systems, such as Habsburg-dominated or the Ottoman-dominated one. Neumann's example was Russia, whose experiences with Mongol suzerainty and, before that, with being a part of a suzerain system centred on Byzantium, infused Muscovy with experiences and memories that formed the reference point for what to expect when getting in contact with international society. This forum broadens this debate by looking not only at one state, but at a set of Central and South-Eastern European states with experiences and memories from various suzerain systems. The articles discuss when and how Romania, Slovakia, Serbia and Turkey began to aspire for membership in international society; experiences, memories and ideas such as translatio imperii that informed what they made of the entry; and how and in what degree the ensuing tensions remain today.