This chapter forms the conceptual core of the book following the main research questions which aim at exploring how BRICS respond to large-scale armed conflict and how we can explain preferences for particular types of action. This chapter provides the reader with a detailed typology. Six ideal type responses are presented ranging from cooperative and multilateralism to neo-imperial and unilateral action. Furthermore, the chapter discusses a number of explanatory variables which have been chosen to explain the choice of response. These are: proximity to conflict, availability of power resources in relation to strategic interests, the type of conflict in terms of its relevance for global order questions, economic consequences of the conflict on BRICS members, the extent to which conflict engagement can resonate with the normative BRICS agenda and lastly responding to conflict in order to act upon global humanitarian norms. The following empirical chapters apply the conceptual framework to four case studies which are Libya, Syria, Ukraine and South Sudan.
Anzeige
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.
See for example: Breslin, Shaun (2013) “China and the global order: signalling threat or friendship?” International Affairs 89(3), 615–634 or Kastner, Scott L. and Saunders, Philip C. (2012) “Is China a Status Quo or Revisionist State? Leadership Travel as an Empirical Indicator of Foreign Policy Priorities” International Studies Quarterly 56(1), 163–177.
George, Alexander and Bennett, Andrew (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: MIT Press, p. 233.
Hart, Andrew and Jones, Bruce (2010) “How Do Rising Powers Rise?”, Survival, 52(6), 63–88. Nolte, Detlef (2010) “How to compare regional powers: analytical concepts and research topics” Review of International Studies 36, 881–901.
Narlikar, Amrita (2013) “Introduction Negotiating the rise of new powers”, International Affairs 89(3), 561–576. Wigell, Mikael (2016) “Conceptualizing regional powers’ geoeconomic strategies: neo-imperialism, neo-mercantilism, hegemony, and liberal institutionalism” Asia Europe Journal 14, 135–151. Stephen, Matthews (2014) “Rising powers, global capitalism and liberal global governance: A historical materialist account of the BRICs challenge” European Journal of International Relations 20(4) 912–938.
The exception is Troitskiy, Mikhail (2015) “BRICS Approaches to Security Multilateralism” ASPJ Africa & Francophonie 76–88 who is maybe the only one who has categorized BRICS responses toward the West. He distinguishes between four response types which are asymmetric, legal constrains, matching strategies and cooperation.
Wigell, Mikael (2016) “Conceptualizing regional powers’ geoeconomic strategies: neo-imperialism, neo-mercantilism, hegemony, and liberal institutionalism” Asia Europe Journal 14, 135–151.
Frazier, Derrick V. and Robert Stewart-Ingersoll (2010) “Regional Powers and Security: A Framework for Understanding Order within Regional Security Complexes” European Journal of International Relations 16(4): 731–753.
Nolte, Detlef (2018) “Regional powers revisited: Status and leadership roles” paper presented at the Regional Powers Revisited conference at GIGA Hamburg 26–27 April 2018.
Carlsnaes, Walter (2013) “Foreign Policy.” In Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons, eds., Handbook of International Relations. 2nd ed. London: Sage, 298–325.
Treib, Oliver (2014) “Implementing and complying with EU governance outputs”, Living Reviews in European Governance, 9(1): http://www.livingreviews.org/lreg-2014-1 accessed 16 Nov. 2017.
Börzel, Tanja (2000) “Why There Is No ‘Southern Problem’: On Environmental Leaders and Laggards in the European Union”, Journal of European Public Policy 7(1): 141–162. Risse, Thomas, Cowles, Maria, Caporaso (2001) “Europeanization and Domestic Change: Introduction” in Risse, Thomas et al. (eds) Transforming Europe Europeanization and Domestic Change. New York: Cornell University Press.
Finnemore, Martha (1996) “Norms, culture, and world politics: Insights from sociology’s institutionalism,” International Organization, 50 (2): 325–347. Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn (1998), “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change” International Organization 52(4), 887–917.
Falleti, Tulia and Lynch, Julia (2009) “Context and Causal Mechanisms in Political Analysis,” Comparative Political Studies 42, 91,143–1166. Bennett, Andrew (2013) “The mother of all isms: Causal mechanisms and structured pluralism in International Relations theory” European Journal of International Relations 19(3) 459–481.
Snidal, Duncan (2013) “Rational Choice and International Relations” in Carlsnaes, Walter, Risse Thomas and Simmons, Beth (eds) Handbook of International Relations. Sage Publishing, 85–111.
Metadaten
Titel
Theoretical Framework: Modeling BRICS Response to Armed Conflict