Project

Back to overview

Which region? The politics of the UN Security Council P5 in international security crises

English title Which region? The politics of the UN Security Council P5 in international security crises
Applicant Wenger Andreas
Number 162925
Funding scheme Project funding (Div. I-III)
Research institution Forschungsstelle für Sicherheitspolitik ETH-Zentrum
Institution of higher education ETH Zurich - ETHZ
Main discipline Political science
Start/End 01.06.2016 - 31.12.2020
Approved amount 558'286.00
Show all

All Disciplines (2)

Discipline
Political science
Social geography and ecology

Keywords (4)

region; crisis; international; security

Lay Summary (German)

Lead
Regionen nehmen in der internationalen Politik immer wichtigere Rollen ein. Dieses Projekt untersucht, welche politischen Folgen das für die internationale Lösung von Sicherheitskrisen hat
Lay summary

Seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg sind es die Vereinten Nationen (VN), die im Zentrum von  internationalen Bemühungen stehen, den Weltfrieden zu wahren und für die internationale Sicherheit zu sorgen. Eher neuer ist die steigende Bedeutung von regionalen Institutionen und Prozessen für die Gewährleistung dieser Sicherheit. Als Ergebnis davon ist das Verhältnis zwischen den Vereinten Nationen und den Regionen für die internationale Politik wichtig geworden. Zum Beispiel wird vermehrt auf gemeinsame Aktionen zwischen den Vereinten Nationen und regionalen Kräften gesetzt, wie z.B. diejenige zwischen den Vereinten Nationen und der Afrikanischen Union in Darfur (2007). Allerdings werden diese Kollaborationsformen durch die vage und politisch sensible Natur des Begriffs "Region" kompliziert. Oft gibt es unterschiedliche Ansichten darüber, wer und was in einer "Region" genau enthalten ist, und wer das Recht hat, für die "Region" zu sprechen.

Dieses Projekt will kritisch analysieren, welche politischen Implikationen sich aus der Art, wie Regionen in den internationalen Sicherheitskrisen repräsentiert werden, ergeben. Wir werden untersuchen, wie sich der VN-Sicherheitsrat und insbesondere die fünf wichtigsten internationalen Akteure (China, Frankreich, Russland, Großbritannien, USA) in den aktuellen Krisen in Afghanistan, Syrien und der Ukraine über diesen Punkt streiten und fragen uns, welche Auswirkungen es auf die internationale Reaktion gehabt hat.

Die Ergebnisse des Projekts werden unser Verständnis für die politische Dynamik hinter den Beziehung zwischen den Vereinten Nationen, den wichtigsten internationalen Akteuren und den Regionen verbessern. Insbesondere werden sie ein neues Licht darauf werfen, wie unterschiedliche Darstellungen von "Regionen" unter wichtigen Akteuren erhebliche politische Auswirkungen auf die Wahrnehmung von und die Reaktion auf internationale Sicherheitskrisen haben.

Direct link to Lay Summary Last update: 06.04.2016

Responsible applicant and co-applicants

Employees

Publications

Publication
Fragmenting and connecting? The diverging geometries and extents of IR’s interdisciplinary knowledge-relations
Aris Stephen (2021), Fragmenting and connecting? The diverging geometries and extents of IR’s interdisciplinary knowledge-relations, in European Journal of International Relations, 27(1), 175-203.
International vs. area? The disciplinary-politics of knowledge-exchange between IR and Area Studies
Aris Stephen (2020), International vs. area? The disciplinary-politics of knowledge-exchange between IR and Area Studies, in International Theory, 1-32.
Common knowledge? Business intellectuals, BRIC and the production of knowledge across global finance and international relations
Aris Stephen, Snetkov Aglaya (2020), Common knowledge? Business intellectuals, BRIC and the production of knowledge across global finance and international relations, in Journal of International Relations and Development, 1.
China’s global connectivity politics
GodehardtNadine, KohlenbergPaul (2020), China’s global connectivity politics, in Kohlenberg Paul, Godehardt Nadine (ed.), Routledge, London, 1-24.
Conclusion
GodehardtNadine, KohlenbergPaul (2020), Conclusion, in Kohlenberg Paul, Godehardt Nadine (ed.), Routledge, London, 1-7.
Territorial crises, states and entitlement at the United Nations security council
FallJuliet, DomingosCarinne (2020), Territorial crises, states and entitlement at the United Nations security council, in Godehardt Nadine, Kohlenberg Paul (ed.), Routledge, London, 1-20.
The Multidimensionality of Regions in World Politics
GodehardtNadine, KohlenbergPaul (2020), The Multidimensionality of Regions in World Politics, Routledge, London.
Conclusion
SnetkovAglaya, WengerAndreas (2018), Conclusion, in Snetkov Aglaya, Wenger Andreas, Aris Stephen (ed.), Routledge, London, 1-20.
Cooperating and Competing: Relations between multilateral organization in International Security
ArisStephen, SnetkovAglaya (2018), Cooperating and Competing: Relations between multilateral organization in International Security, in Wenger Andreas, Snetkov Aglaya, Aris Stephen (ed.), Routledge, London, 1-20.
In-between Europe and Asia: Regional organisations and Eurasian region-making
ArisStephen, SnetkovAglaya (2018), In-between Europe and Asia: Regional organisations and Eurasian region-making, in Aris Stephen, Snetkov Aglaya, Wenger Andreas (ed.), Routledge, London, 1-20.
Inter-Organisational Relations in International Security: Competition and Cooperation
ArisStephen, SnetkovAglaya, WengerAndreas (2018), Inter-Organisational Relations in International Security: Competition and Cooperation, Routledge, London.
Introducing UNSCdeb8 (beta): A Database for Corpus-Driven Research on the United Nations Security Council
KohlenbergPaul, GodehardtNadine, ArisStephen, SündermannFrank, SnetkovAglaya, FallJuliet (2018), Introducing UNSCdeb8 (beta): A Database for Corpus-Driven Research on the United Nations Security Council, in SWP Working Paper Asia Division, 1-30.
Long-distance Relationships: African Peacekeeping
ArisStephen, KönigK (2018), Long-distance Relationships: African Peacekeeping, in CSS Analyses, 1.
One Belt, One Road: China’s Vision of “Connectivity”
ArisStephen (2016), One Belt, One Road: China’s Vision of “Connectivity”, in CSS Analysis, 195, 1.

Collaboration

Group / person Country
Types of collaboration
Geography Department at the University of Geneva Switzerland (Europe)
- in-depth/constructive exchanges on approaches, methods or results
- Publication
Asia Division at the Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik Germany (Europe)
- in-depth/constructive exchanges on approaches, methods or results
- Publication

Scientific events

Active participation

Title Type of contribution Title of article or contribution Date Place Persons involved
European International Studies Association 11th Pan-European Conference on International Relations Talk given at a conference Contesting boundaries, political entities and scales of regulation: Making and governing 23.03.2017 Barcelona, Spain Aris Stephen;
Imaginaries of Connectivity and the Creation of Novel Spaces of Governance Talk given at a conference Connecting Eurasia: The Belt & Road Initiative and the reimagining of Eurasian spatial governance 01.02.2017 Groningen, Netherlands Aris Stephen;
British International Studies Association Annual Conference Talk given at a conference In-between Europe and Asia: the politics of Eurasian region-making 23.11.2016 Edinburgh, Great Britain and Northern Ireland Aris Stephen;


Self-organised

Title Date Place
Book authors’ conference: ‘Which region? The spatial and scalar politics of regions and the regional in international politics and security’ 02.03.2018 Zurich, Switzerland

Use-inspired outputs

Software

Name Year
UNSCdeb8 2018


Abstract

Summary: There is near consensus among leading international political actors that future efforts to manage international security should include a greater role for regions and regional actors. There is, however, much less agreement on what this entails and how it should work. Indeed, the concept of the region/regional remains an essentially contested one within international politics. For instance, international actors have put forward overlapping and contradictory plans for a regional solution to insecurity in Afghanistan. While during the 2011 Libyan crisis, leading international actors supported opposing regional organizations as the source of the legitimate regional perspective. Against this background, this project investigates the politics of how regions and regional actors are represented in international security governance. It does so by focusing on how international actors politically articulate the region/regional during international security crisis, and asking what impact this has on the international response to these crises. The UN Security Council remains the key international forum and actor for representing, debating and responding to international security crisis. And its Permanent Five (P5) members - US, China, France, Russia and UK - with their veto-power are the most significant influences on the UNSC position on a security crisis. Taking this into account, we: one, examine how the P5 as foreign policy actors politically constitute regions, regional actors and regional organisations during international security crises; and, two, analyse how the P5 assert these positions vis-à-vis one another and other participants in UNSC meetings and debates. Our analysis is centred on three recent case studies of international security crises: Afghanistan (2011), Syria/Iraq/ISIS (2011-); Ukraine/Crimea (2014-). In all of these crises, the designation of the region and the role for regional actors has been disputed and contested. These three cases thus represent test-cases for investigating the nature and the impact of agreement/disagreement on the region/regional among key actors in contemporary international security governance. And, for considering what impact this has on the international response to the crises. The project sets itself three key research objectives:?To assess how the greater emphasis on and legitimacy attributed to the region/regional in international politics effects the governance of international security crises? ?To investigate how key international actors (the P5, UNSC) are representing the region/regional in international security crises, and what effect is this having on their perspective on the crises? ?To evaluate the degree to which perspectives on the region/regional, and its role in efforts at governing international security, are contested among key international actors (the P5, UNSC)? The findings of this project have both wider academic and broader policy relevance and impacts. In academic terms, it will contribute to our current understanding of regions and regional security within the discipline of International Relations (IR), including by building interdisciplinary concepts between IR and Political Geography. In policy terms, it will contribute to the on-going debate about how to include the region and regional actors in contemporary collective arrangements of international security governance.
-