Abstract
This chapter develops a coherent analytical framework about normative change in a security community. This framework suggests that the path of security community disintegration is similar to its formation but under opposing signs. First, the normative order of a security community includes the norm of common values, the norm of multilateral practice, and the norm of communication. Second, the nature of agency in a security community is framed as a conflict between norm leaders and norm challengers. Third, disintegration involves three levels of change (external, social and internal, normative). Finally, the path of disintegration can be analytically traced via four stages (dysfunction, decline, denial, disintegration).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This statement is not a contradiction to my argument raised in the previous chapter, which claims that changing individual norms and ideas about the intragroup relationship may serve as the primary explanation for the disintegration of pluralistic security communities. As already pointed out, I certainly do not claim that norms and ideas can be expected to explain the process of security community disintegration completely.
- 2.
Deutsch and his associates (1957, p. 48) define a distinctive way of life as ‘a set of socially accepted values and institutional means for their pursuit and attainment, and a set of established or emerging habits of behavior corresponding to them’.
- 3.
By localization is meant ‘the active construction (through discourse, framing, grafting, and cultural selection) of foreign ideas by local actors, which results in the former developing significant congruence with local beliefs and practices’ (Acharya 2004, p. 245).
- 4.
Ideology may be understood as ‘a set of closely-related beliefs or ideas, or even attitudes, characteristic of a group or community’ (Plamenatz 1970, p. 15) or, in other words, ‘the whole outlook of a social group (…) its total Weltanschauung (or mentalité) as conditioned sociologically by the group’s political orientation, and temporally by its location in the ongoing historical process’ (Mannheim 1936, pp. 57 and 125). For a detailed discussion of the concept, please refer to Mullins (1972), Howard (1989), and Gerring (1997).
- 5.
According to Karl W. Deutsch, depoliticization means that an issue is made non-political and taken off the political agenda.
- 6.
This conception of a security community as a community of practice shares some significant theoretical and empirical overlaps with Adler’s concept of the same name (Adler 2005; Adler and Pouliot 2011). However, while I treat this concept as part of the general normative framework of a security community, Adler and other proponents of a practice approach to IR (especially Pouliot 2008, p. 258) treat the logic of practice as ontologically prior to other forms of social action (logic of consequence, logic of appropriateness, logic of arguing) (see also Koschut 2014b).
- 7.
Quoted in: Spiegel Online (2013), The Rise of Fearmongers: Germany’s New Eurosceptic Elite, http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/new-anti-euro-figures-in-germany-offer-vague-ideas-and-fan-fears-a-906675.html, date accessed 14 January 2014.
- 8.
In studying norms, many IR scholars have used the concept of norm entrepreneurship to describe agents that are either supportive or in opposition of norm development (Müller and Wunderlich 2013; Nadelmann 1990; Finnemore and Sikkink 1998; Risse et al. 2013). Norm entrepreneurship is thus understood here as a superordinate concept that includes both norm leaders and challengers.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
While NATO forms the core organizational structure for the transatlantic security community, certain NATO members may not be recognized as members of the security community and vice versa. For example, there continue to be military stand-offs between Greece and Turkey over Cyprus. On the other hand, while Austria is not a formal member of NATO and only recently joined the EU, it certainly can be counted as a member of the transatlantic security community (Bellamy 2004, p. 9).
- 12.
Beginning during World War II, the USA and Mexico developed into a pluralistic security community ending an era of military confrontations and cross-border raids including common institutions like NAFTA. With increasing illegal immigration and drug trafficking from Mexico, however, the incentives for integration and the foundations for mutual trust have severely deteriorated (Gonzales and Haggard 1998, p. 295).
- 13.
Adler defines cognitive evolution as ‘a historical process (by which) institutional or social facts may be socially constructed by collective understandings of the physical and the social world that are subject to authoritative (political) selection processes and thus to evolutionary change’ (Adler 1997, p. 106).
- 14.
Malintegration exists when ‘the main components of the culture are out of balance and the messages emanating from the culture are at odds with the realities of social structure’ (Merton 1949, p. 556).
- 15.
Social psychology research has demonstrated how the introduction of an extrinsic motivator (external pressure or reward) can lead to overjustification that ‘crowds out’ intrinsic motivation (enjoyment in the performance itself). For example, children who enjoyed drawing pictures without expectation of reward lost interest in that activity once a reward for the drawing was introduced but subsequently withdrawn (Lepper et al. 1973).
- 16.
Adversarial peace is characterized by ‘sharp ideological differences, intensive propaganda warfare, and mutual perceptions of grave threat and deep distrust, despite a formal peace’ (Shamir 1992, pp. 8–9).
References
Acharya, A. (2001). Constructing a security community in Southeast Asia. ASEAN and the problem of regional order. London: Routledge.
Acharya, A. (2004). How ideas spread: whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism’. International Organization, 8(2), 239–275.
Acharya, A. (2011). Norm subsidiarity and regional orders: Sovereignty, regionalism, and rule-making in the third world. International Studies Quarterly, 55(1), 95–123.
Adler, E. (1997). Imagined (security) communities: Cognitive regions in international relations. Millennium, 26(2), 249–277.
Adler, E. (2001). The change of change: Peaceful transitions of power in the multilateral age. In C. A. Kupchan, E. Adler, J. M. Coicaud, & Y. F. Khong (Eds.), Power in transition: The peaceful change of international order (pp. 138–158). New York: United Nations University Press.
Adler, E. (2005). Communitarian international relations. The epistemic foundations of international relations. New York: Routledge.
Adler, E., & Barnett, M. (1998). A framework for the study of security communities. In E. Adler & M. Barnett (Eds.), Security communities (pp. 29–66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Adler, E., & Crawford, B. (1991). Progress in post-war international relations. New York: Columbia University Press.
Adler, E., & Greve, P. (2009). When security community meets balance of power. Overlapping regional mechanisms of security governance. Review of International Studies, 35(1), 59–84.
Adler, E., & Pouliot, V. (Eds.). (2011). International practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Armstrong, D. (1993). Revolution and world order: The revolutionary state in international society. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Avant, D. D., Finnemore, M., & Sell, S. K. (2010). Who governs the globe? New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Bauman, Z. (2001). Community: Seeking safety in an insecure world. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bauman, Z. (2004). Liquid sociality. In N. Gane (Ed.), The future of social theory (pp. 17–46). London: Continuum.
Bellah, R. N. (1967). Civil religion in America. Daedalus, 96, 1–21.
Bellamy, A. J. (2004). Security communities and their neighbours. Regional fortresses or global integrators? New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bengtsson, R. (2000). The cognitive dimension of stable peace. In A. Kacowicz, Y. Bar-Siman-Tov, O. Elgström, & M. Jerneck (Eds.), Stable peace among nations (pp. 92–107). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Berger, T. U. (1996). Norms, identity, and national security in Germany and Japan. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security (pp. 317–356). New York: Columbia University Press.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City: Doubleday.
Bially Mattern, J. (2001). The power politics of identity. European Journal of International Relations, 7(3), 349–397.
Björkdahl, A. (2002). Norms in international relations: Some conceptual and methodological reflections. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 15(1), 9–23.
Booth, K., & Wheeler, N. J. (2008). The security dilemma: Fear, cooperation and trust in world politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2013). Human rights in areas of limited statehood: The new agenda. In T. Risse, S. C. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights (pp. 63–84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Braveboy-Wagner, J. A. (2009). Institutions of the global south. New York: Routledge.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.
Castano, E. (2004). European identity: A social-psychological perspective. In R. K. Herrmann, T. Risse, & M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Transnational identities. Becoming European in the EU. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Checkel, J. T. (1999). Norms, institutions, and national identity in contemporary Europe. International Studies Quarterly, 43(1), 84–114.
Checkel, J. T. (2001). Why comply? Social learning and European identity change. International Organization, 55(3), 553–588.
Coleman, K. P. (2013). Locating norm diplomacy: Venue change in international norm negotiations. European Journal of International Relations, 19(1), 163–186.
Collins, R. (1998). The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Daase, C. (2003). Das Ende vom Anfang des nuklearen Tabus. Zur Legitimitätskrise der Weltnuklearordnung’. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 10(1), 7–41.
Davis, J. W. (2000). Understanding the domestic impact of international norms: A research agenda. International Studies Review, 2(1), 65–87.
Deitelhoff, N. (2009). The discursive process of legalization. Charting islands of persuasion in the ICC case. International Organization, 63(1), 33–66.
Deutsch, K. W. (1953). The growth of nations. Some recurrent patterns of political and social integration. World Politics, 5(2), 168–196.
Deutsch, K. W. (1954). Political community at the international level. Problems of definition and measurement. Garden City: Doubleday.
Deutsch, K. W. (1961). Security communities. In J. N. Rosenau (Ed.), International politics and foreign policy. A reader in research and theory (pp. 98–105). New York: Free Press.
Deutsch, K. W. (1966). The nerves of government, models of political communication and control. New York: Free Press.
Deutsch, K. W. (1969). The analysis of international relations (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Deutsch, K. W. (1970). Politics and government. How people decide their fate. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Deutsch, K. W. (1979). Tides among nations. New York: Free Press.
Deutsch, K. W., Burrell, S. A., Kann, R. A., Lee, M., Jr., Lichterman, M., Lindgren, R. E., Loewenheim, F. L., & van Wagenen, R. W. (1957). Political community and the North Atlantic area. International organization in the light of historical experience. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Dewey, J. (1922). The human nature and conduct. An introduction to social psychology. New York: Henry Holt.
Diez, T. (2004). Europe’s others and the return of geopolitics. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17(2), 319–335.
Durkheim, E. (1897/2002). Suicide. A study in sociology. New York: Routledge.
Eberwein, W. D. (1995). The future of international warfare: Toward a global security community? International Political Science Review, 16(4), 341–360.
Farrell, T. (2001). Transnational norms and military development: Constructing Ireland’s professional army. European Journal of International Relations, 7(1), 63–102.
Festinger, L. (1962). Cognitive dissonance. Scientific American, 207(4), 93–107.
Finnemore, M. (1993). International organizations as teachers of norms: The United Nations educational, scientific, and cultural organization and science policy. International Organization, 47(4), 565–597.
Finnemore, M. (1996). National interests in international society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Finnemore, M. (2003). The purpose of intervention: Changing beliefs about the use of force. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (2001). Taking stock: The constructivist research program in international relations and comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 4, 391–416.
Fligstein, N. (2009). Who are the Europeans and how does this matter for politics? In J. T. Checkel & P. J. Katzenstein (Eds.), European identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Foot, R., & Walter, A. (2013). Global norms and major state behaviour: The cases of China and the United States. European Journal of International Relations, 19(2), 329–352.
Forst, R., & Günther, K. (2011). Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnung. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.
Gerring, J. (1997). Ideology: A definitional analysis. Political Research Quarterly, 50(4), 957–994.
Gonzalez, G., & Haggard, S. (1998). The United States and Mexico: A pluralistic security community? In E. Adler & M. Barnett (Eds.), Security communities (pp. 295–332). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodman, R., & Jinks, D. (2013). Social mechanisms to promote international human rights: Complementary or contradictory? In T. Risse, S. C. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights (pp. 103–121). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gurowitz, A. (1999). Mobilizing international norms: Domestic actors, immigrants, and the Japanese state. World Politics, 51(3), 413–445.
Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Hagan, J. D. (2000). Domestic political sources of stable peace. The great powers, 1815–1854. In A. Kacowicz, Y. Bar-Siman-Tov, O. Elgström, & M. Jerneck (Eds.), Stable peace among nations (pp. 36–54). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Haglund, D. G. (2007). A security community – “if you can keep it”: Demographic change and the North American zone of peace. Nortamérica, 2(1), 77–100.
Hall, P. A. (1989). The political power of economic ideas: Keynesianism across nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Heller, R., Kahl, M., & Pisoiu, D. (2012). The “dark” side of normative argumentation. The case of counterterrorism policy. Global Constitutionalism, 1(2), 278–312.
Herman, R. G. (1996). Identity, norms, and national security: The Soviet foreign policy revolution and the end of the Cold War. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security (pp. 271–316). New York: Columbia University Press.
Herman, N. J., & Reynolds, L. T. (1994). Symbolic interaction: An introduction to social psychology. New York: General Hall.
Holsti, K. J. (1967). International politics. A framework for analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Holsti, K. J. (1982). Why nations realign: Foreign policy restructuring in the postwar world. London: Allen and Unwin.
Holsti, K. J. (1998). The problem of change in international relations theory (Working paper 26). Vancouver: University of British Columbia.
Hopf, T. (2010). The logic of habit in international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 16(4), 539–561.
Howard, M. (1989). Ideology and international relations. Review of International Studies, 15(1), 1–10.
Ikenberry, G. J. (2001). After victory. Institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Ikenberry, G. J., & Kupchan, C. A. (1990). Socialization and hegemonic power. International Organization, 44(3), 283–315.
Imbusch, P., & Heitmeyer, W. (2008). Integration – Desintegration. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Jervis, R. (1976). Perception and misperception in international politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Johnston, A. I. (2007). Social states: China in international institutions, 1980–2000. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Jones, D. V. (1991). Code of peace. Ethics and security in the world of the warlord states. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kacowicz, A. M., & Bar-Siman-Tov, Y. (2000). Stable peace. A conceptual framework. In A. Kacowicz, Y. Bar-Siman-Tov, O. Elgström, & M. Jerneck (Eds.), Stable peace among nations (pp. 11–35). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Kaelbe, H. (2009). Identification with Europe and politicization of the EU since the 1980s. In J. T. Checkel & P. J. Katzenstein (Eds.), European identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Katzenstein, P. J. (1996). Introduction: Alternative perspectives on national security. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security (pp. 1–32). New York: Columbia University Press.
Katzenstein, P. J. (2005). A world of regions. Asia and Europe in the American imperium. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders. Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Keohane, R. O. (1989). International institutions and state power: Essays in international relations theory. Boulder: Westview Press.
Keohane, R. O. (1990). Multilateralism: An agenda for research. International Journal, 45(3), 731–764.
Kitchen, V. M. (2009). Argument and identity change in the Atlantic security community. Security Dialogue, 40(1), 95–114.
Kleger, H. (2008). Gibt es eine europäische Zivilreligion? Pariser Vorlesung über die Werte Europas. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag.
Kleger, H., & Mehlhausen, T. (2013). Unstrittig und doch umstritten. Europäische Solidarität in der Eurokrise’. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 54(1), 50–74.
Koschut, S. (2010). Die Grenzen der Zusammenarbeit. Sicherheit und transatlantische Identität nach dem Ende des Ost-West-Konflikts. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Koschut, S. (2014a). Emotional (security) communities: The significance of emotion norms in inter-allied conflict management. Review of International Studies, 40(3), 533–558.
Koschut, S. (2014b). Transatlantic conflict management inside-out: The impact of domestic norms on regional security practices. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 27(2), 339–361.
Kowert, P., & Legro, J. (1996). Norms, identity, and their limits. A theoretical reprise. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security (pp. 451–497). New York: Columbia University Press.
Král, D. (2009). Not your grandfather’s eastern bloc. The EU new member states as agenda setters in the enlarged European Union (Comparative policy report). Prague: European Policies Initiative.
Krasner, S. D. (1983). Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables. In S. D. Krasner (Ed.), International regimes (pp. 1–22). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Kupchan, C. A. (2010). How enemies become friends. The sources of stable peace. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Langer, S. K. (1942). Philosophy in a new key. A study in the symbolism of reason, rite, and art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lantis, J. S. (2011). Redefining the nonproliferation norm? Australian uranium, the NPT, and the global nuclear revival. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 57(4), 543–561.
Legro, J. W. (1997). Which norms matter? Revisiting the “failure” of internationalism. International Organization, 51(1), 31–63.
Legro, J. W. (2000). The transformation of policy ideas. American Journal of Political Science, 44(3), 419–432.
Lepper, M. R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining children’s intrinsic interest with extrinsic reward: A test of the “overjustification” hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129–137.
Levy, J. S. (1994). Learning and foreign policy: Sweeping a conceptual minefield. International Organization, 48(2), 279–312.
Liese, A. (2006). Staaten am Pranger: Zur Wirkung internationaler Regime auf innerstaatliche Menschenrechtspolitik. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Mannheim, K. (1936). Ideology and utopia. London: Routledge.
McNamara, K. R. (2010). Constructing authority in the European Union. In D. D. Avant, M. Finnemore, & S. K. Sell (Eds.), Who governs the globe? (pp. 153–181). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McWilliam, E. L. (2005). Unlearning pedagogy. Journal of Learning Design, 1(1), 1–11.
Mead, H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Merkel, W. (2010). Are dictatorships returning? Revisiting the “democratic rollback” hypothesis. Contemporary Politics, 16(1), 17–31.
Merton, R. K. (1949). Social theory and social structure. Glencoe: The Free Press.
Michel, T. (2013). Time to get emotional: Phronetic reflections on the concept of trust in international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 19(4), 864–890.
Milburn, M. A., & Conrad, S. D. (1996). The politics of denial. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Misztal, B. A. (1996). Trust in modern societies: The search for the bases of social order. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Müller, H. (2006). A theory of decay of security communities with an application to the present state of the Atlantic alliance (Working paper). Berkeley: University of California at Berkeley.
Müller, H. (2013). Conclusion: Agency matters. In H. Müller & C. Wunderlich (Eds.), Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control. Interests, conflicts, and justice (pp. 141–162). Athens: Georgia University Press.
Müller, H., & Wolff, J. (2006). Democratic peace: Many data, little explanation? In A. Geis, L. Brock, & H. Müller (Eds.), Democratic wars. Looking at the dark side of democratic peace (pp. 41–73). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Müller, H., & Wunderlich, C. (2013). Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control. Interests, conflicts, and justice. Athens: Georgia University Press.
Müller, H., Fey, M., & Rauch, C. (2013). Winds of change: Exogenous events and trends as norm triggers (or norm killers). In H. Müller & C. Wunderlich (Eds.), Norm dynamics in multilateral arms control. Interests, conflicts, and justice (pp. 141–160). Athens: Georgia University Press.
Mullins, W. A. (1972). On the concept of ideology in political science. American Political Science Review, 66(2), 498–510.
Nadelmann, E. A. (1990). Global prohibition regimes: The evolution of norms in international society. International Organization, 44(4), 479–526.
Nathan, L. (2006). Domestic instability and security communities. European Journal of International Relations, 12(2), 275–299.
Nietzsche, F. (1958). Ecce Homo. In K. Schlechta (Ed.), Friedrich Nietzsche. Werke in drei Bänden (Vol. 2). München: Hanser.
Nye, J. S. (1987). Nuclear learning and U.S.-Soviet security regimes. International Organization, 41(3), 371–402.
Nyhamar, T. (2000). How do norms work? A theoretical and empirical analysis of African international relations. International Journal of Peace Studies, 5(2), 27–43.
Odell, J. S. (1982). U.S. international monetary policy: Markets, power, and ideas as sources of change. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Owen, J. M., IV. (2000). Pieces of maximal peace. Common identities, common enemies. In A. Kacowicz, Y. Bar-Siman-Tov, O. Elgström, & M. Jerneck (Eds.), Stable peace among nations (pp. 74–91). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Panke, D., & Petersohn, U. (2012). Why international norms disappear sometimes. European Journal of International Relations, 18(4), 719–742.
Pateman, T. (2002). Lifelong unlearning. In D. Barford (Ed.), The ship of thought. Essays on psychoanalysis and learning. London: Karnac.
Peters, B. (1993). Die Integration moderner Gesellschaften. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Plamenatz, J. (1970). Ideology. London: Pall Mall.
Pouliot, V. (2008). The logic of practicality. A theory of practice of security communities. International Organization, 62(2), 257–288.
Price, R. (1997). The chemical weapons taboo. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Price, R., & Tannenwald, N. (1996). Norms and deterrence: The nuclear and chemical weapons taboos. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security (pp. 114–152). New York: Columbia University Press.
Rappaport, R. A. (1999). Ritual and religion in the making of humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Risse, T. (2000). Let’s argue! Communicative action in world politics. International Organization, 54(1), 1–39.
Risse, T. (2010). A community of Europeans? Transnational identities and public spheres. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (1999). The power of human rights: International norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (2013). The persistent power of human rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Risse-Kappen, T. (1994). Ideas do not float freely: Transnational coalitions, domestic structures, and the end of the Cold War. International Organization, 48(2), 185–214.
Risse-Kappen, T. (1996). Collective identity in a democratic community: The case of NATO. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), The culture of national security (pp. 357–399). New York: Columbia University Press.
Rosenfeld, M. (1998). Just interpretations: Law between ethics and politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Rosert, E., & Schirmbeck, S. (2007). Zur Erosion internationaler Normen: Folterverbot und nukleares Tabu in der Diskussion’. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 14(2), 253–288.
Rothschild, J., & Wingfield, N. M. (2000). Return to diversity: A political history of East Central Europe since World War II. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rublee, M. R. (2008). Taking stock of the nuclear proliferation regime: Using social psychology to understand regime effectiveness. International Studies Review, 10(3), 420–450.
Ruggie, J. G. (1983). International regimes, transactions and change: Embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. In S. D. Krasner (Ed.), International regimes (pp. 195–232). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Ruggie, J. G. (1993). Territoriality and beyond: Problematizing modernity in international relations. International Organization, 47(1), 139–174.
Russett, B. M. (1998). A neo-Kantian perspective: Democracy, interdependence, and international organizations in building security communities. In E. Adler & M. Barnett (Eds.), Security communities (pp. 368–394). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sandholtz, W., & Stiles, K. W. (2009). International norms and cycles of change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schmitz, H. P., & Sikkink, K. (2002). Human rights. In W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, & B. A. Simmons (Eds.), Handbook of international relations (pp. 517–537). London: Sage.
Shamir, S. (1992). From conflict to peace. Stages along the road. United States Institute of Peace Journal, 5(6), 7–9.
Sikkink, K. (2013). The United States and torture: Does the spiral model work? In T. Risse, S. C. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights (pp. 145–163). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simmons, B. A. (2013). From ratification to compliance: Quantitative evidence on the spiral model. In T. Risse, S. C. Ropp, & K. Sikkink (Eds.), The persistent power of human rights (pp. 43–60). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sjöström, E. (2010). Shareholders as norm entrepreneurs for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(2), 177–191.
Solingen, E. (2012). Of dominoes and firewalls: The domestic, regional, and global politics of international diffusion. International Studies Quarterly, 56(4), 631–644.
Stipe, M. (2004). The demise of Yugoslavia: A political memoir. Budapest: Central European University Press.
Sunstein, C. R. (1996). Social norms and social roles. Columbia Law Review, 96(4), 903–968.
Tannenwald, N. (1999). The nuclear taboo: The United States and the normative basis of nuclear non-use. International Organization, 53(3), 433–468.
Taylor, C. (1971). Interpretation and the sciences of man. Review of Metaphysics, 25(1), 3–51.
Tilly, C. (1995). Popular contention in Great Britain, 1758–1834. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Väyrynen, R. (2000). Stable peace through security communities: Steps towards theory-building. In A. Kacowicz, Y. Bar-Siman-Tov, O. Elgström, & M. Jerneck (Eds.), Stable peace among nations (pp. 108–129). Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.
Wæver, O. (1995). Securitization and desecuritization. In R. D. Lipschutz (Ed.), On security (pp. 46–86). New York: Columbia University Press.
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–426.
Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wendt, A. (2003). Why a world state is inevitable. European Journal of International Relations, 9(4), 491–542.
Wiener, A. (2008). The invisible constitution of politics. Contested norms and international encounters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wiener, A., & Puetter, U. (2009). The quality of norms is what actors make of it. Journal of International Law and International Relations, 5(1), 1–16.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Koschut, S. (2016). Security Community Disintegration: An Analytical Framework. In: Normative Change and Security Community Disintegration. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30324-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30324-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30323-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30324-6
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)