Journal of Global Security Studies最新文献

Multilateral Maritime Exercises, Grand Strategy, and Strategic Change: The American Case and Beyond 多边海上演习、大战略和战略变革：美国案例及其他

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-06-12 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogae017

Peter Dombrowski, Simon Reich

引用次数: 0

Trust at Risk: The Effect of Proximity to Cyberattacks 岌岌可危的信任：接近网络攻击的影响

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-03-12 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogae002

Miguel Alberto Gomez, Ryan Shandler

{"title":"Trust at Risk: The Effect of Proximity to Cyberattacks","authors":"Miguel Alberto Gomez, Ryan Shandler","doi":"10.1093/jogss/ogae002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogae002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Proximity is a core feature of theories of political violence, with the effects of attacks rippling outward so that geographically proximate individuals experience more severe effects than those more distant. However, this model of proximity and exposure is unlikely to recur for cyberattacks. The incorporeality of cyber incidents and the absence of a physical epicenter constrain the mechanism coupling physical distance with harm. To empirically test the relationship between proximity and cyberattacks, we conducted a field study involving 707 German respondents following a ransomware attack in Düsseldorf. We find that the classical “ripple effect” is reversed, with political trust highest among people closer to the attack and lowest among those geographically distant. We postulate that in the absence of firsthand exposure to its effects, geographically distant individuals employ abstract conceptions of the consequences of cyber incidents that do not align with actual events. Consequently, distance does not confer security, and it can even amplify the adverse effects of exposure. This finding highlights the need for governments to actively work to assuage public fears following cyberattacks.","PeriodicalId":44399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Security Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140249462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Do States Really Sink Costs to Signal Resolve? 各国是否真的会为发出信号的决心付出代价？

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-03-12 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogae008

Dan Altman, Kai Quek

引用次数: 0

Contested Legitimating Agents: The Regional “Battle” for Legitimacy in Venezuela 有争议的合法化代理人：委内瑞拉的地区合法性 "争夺战

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogae005

Daniel F Wajner

{"title":"Contested Legitimating Agents: The Regional “Battle” for Legitimacy in Venezuela","authors":"Daniel F Wajner","doi":"10.1093/jogss/ogae005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogae005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Practitioners, pundits, and scholars increasingly recognize the role that international organizations play in conflicts. Regional organizations (ROs), as brokers of collective security, welfare, and identity, have become particularly active agents during violent crises by granting legitimacy to certain protagonists and discrediting the legitimacy of others, thus affecting international policymaking. However, existing research generally assesses the legitimizing effects of ROs in either a static way, in which the stances of their member states do not change over time, or in an institutional vacuum, where ROs are not challenged by other ROs. This study aims to shed light on the impact of multiple ROs dynamically and simultaneously intervening in legitimation struggles. It focuses on the 2014–2020 regional “battle” over the legitimate authority of the Chavista–Madurista regime in Venezuela, examining how multiple Latin American ROs articulated their discourse seeking to influence the crisis’ outcomes. To this end, a multi-step process tracing based on four phases (opening, deliberation, judgment, and denouement) is applied. The findings reveal the lively competition between involved actors for the recognition of ROs as the relevant legitimating agents, and the limits faced in achieving collective action when polarization over such a regional legitimating role prevails. The study has novel implications for scholarly understanding of the role of legitimation dynamics in promoting international cooperation during periods of disruption.","PeriodicalId":44399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Security Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140511698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Digital Rights and the State of Exception. Internet Shutdowns from the Perspective of Just Securitization Theory 数字权利与例外状态。从公正安全论的角度看互联网关闭问题

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogad024

Johannes Thumfart

{"title":"Digital Rights and the State of Exception. Internet Shutdowns from the Perspective of Just Securitization Theory","authors":"Johannes Thumfart","doi":"10.1093/jogss/ogad024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogad024","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Addressing cases from Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Spain, Togo, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Zimbabwe, this article discusses the global phenomenon of internet shutdowns (ISs) from the normative perspective of Just Securitization Theory (JST). It focuses on the conflict between arguments used to justify ISs and the negative impact of ISs regarding fundamental and human rights. This article develops strict criteria for when ISs might be legitimate as extraordinary security measures in emergency situations. Following JST, these criteria are based on citizens’ right to physical integrity, the expectation of reasonable success, proportionality, harm minimization, and specificity. I argue that it is not legitimate to use ISs to enact collective punishment, preemptive censorship, or hamper legitimate political protests. While denying the legitimacy of the vast majority of ISs on these grounds, I sketch four exceptional scenarios (“WhatsApp lynchings,” “US Capitol 2021,” “Computer virus,” and “False alarm”) in which ISs can be legitimate. JST also includes states’ duty to desecuritize once a threat has been neutralized. In this way, a balanced discussion of ISs as an exceptional measure from the perspective of JST contributes to the establishment of a customary positive human right to digital connectivity in the normal situation.","PeriodicalId":44399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Security Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139444133","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Violence beyond the Battlefield: Civilian Targeting, Sexual Violence, and Women’s Political Empowerment 战场之外的暴力：平民目标、性暴力和妇女的政治赋权

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogae001

B. Savun, Jessica A Stanton, C. Hartzell, Lindsay Reid

{"title":"Violence beyond the Battlefield: Civilian Targeting, Sexual Violence, and Women’s Political Empowerment","authors":"B. Savun, Jessica A Stanton, C. Hartzell, Lindsay Reid","doi":"10.1093/jogss/ogae001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogae001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Research has established links between intrastate conflict and political gains by women following war, suggesting that changes of a positive nature can emerge from the misery of war. While much of the empirical focus on conflicts’ transformative effects has been on battle-related violence, we investigate whether pro-social effects are associated with two other types of violence perpetrated against civilians—one-sided violence and sexual violence. We expect that both one-sided violence and sexual violence spur mobilization, which in turn contributes to gains in women’s political empowerment. Informed by feminist scholarship, we also draw attention to social and political constraints associated with high levels of sexual violence, restrictions that we argue women are unlikely to confront to a similar degree with respect to high levels of one-sided and other forms of violence. We posit that these factors will result in the attenuation of gains in women’s political power in conflicts characterized by high levels of sexual violence. Using cross-national data on civil conflicts for the period 1989–2017, we find that moderate levels of sexual violence are consistently associated with gains in women’s political empowerment, an effect that diminishes in conflicts marked by widespread sexual violence. One-sided violence, on the other hand, is not associated with improvements in women’s political empowerment. Our results demonstrate the importance of considering the different forms of wartime violence, and the differential impacts these forms of violence have on women.","PeriodicalId":44399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Security Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140511590","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Geopolitics and Genocide: Patron Interests, Client Crises, and Realpolitik 地缘政治与种族灭绝：赞助人利益、客户危机和现实政治

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogad023

Sascha Nanlohy

{"title":"Geopolitics and Genocide: Patron Interests, Client Crises, and Realpolitik","authors":"Sascha Nanlohy","doi":"10.1093/jogss/ogad023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogad023","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Genocide is a catastrophic event in international relations. States that experience genocide often have powerful external patrons that influence its likelihood. Yet, the external dynamics of genocide are often overlooked. This paper examines the constraining or enabling role of external patrons and what motivates their decisions. This research theorizes that patron states can permit or restrain genocide, depending on their interests in the client state. The study uses a qualitative comparative case analysis to focus on the role of patron military assistance, comparing genocide in Rwanda (1990–1994), and the role of France with the high-risk non-genocide in Nagorno-Karabakh (1991–1994) and Russian support to Armenia. I argue that patron actions can be understood through the prism of great or regional power competition and are generally determined by motivations conforming to a logic of realpolitik; the prospect of loss of influence significantly affects the likelihood of genocide. These processes can be observed through variations in patron military assistance and patterns of violence. A better understanding of these dynamics is critical to the study of international relations and international security, with policy implications for atrocity prevention in a period of intensifying great power competition.","PeriodicalId":44399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Security Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139441410","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Conscription and Gender in Mass Opinion on Foreign Affairs: South Korean Views of North Korea 群众外交舆论中的征兵和性别问题：南韩对北韩的看法

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogad025

Joonbum Bae, YuJung Julia Lee

引用次数: 0

The Politics of Risking Peace Revisited: The Fate of Rebel Leaders Who Signed Peace Agreements 重温冒险和平的政治学：签署和平协议的反叛领导人的命运

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogae006

Juliana Tappe Ortiz

引用次数: 0

Better to Trust in the Lord? Religious Salience, Regime Religiosity, and Interstate Dispute Resolution 信靠上帝更好？宗教显著性、政权宗教性与国家间争端解决

IF 1.6

Journal of Global Security Studies Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI: 10.1093/jogss/ogae003

Ariel Zellman, Florian Justwan, Jonathan Fox

{"title":"Better to Trust in the Lord? Religious Salience, Regime Religiosity, and Interstate Dispute Resolution","authors":"Ariel Zellman, Florian Justwan, Jonathan Fox","doi":"10.1093/jogss/ogae003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogae003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 How do religiously salient issues influence the peaceful resolution of interstate territorial disputes? Conflict scholars tend to represent “religious” disputes as uniquely resistant to compromise owing to their supposed symbolic indivisibility and the ideological inflexibility of the actors who pursue them. Rather, we argue that religious regimes’ preferred forums to advance peaceful resolution depend upon interactions between the breadth of a dispute’s religious salience and a claimant regime’s domestic religious legitimacy. Secular regimes lack both religious legitimacy and political motivation to engage. Thus, their dispute resolution forum preferences are unrelated to religious salience. Highly religious regimes command significant religious legitimacy and are therefore empowered to directly negotiate over broadly salient religious issues. Yet their political dependence upon religious constituencies causes them to strictly avoid legally binding conflict management over narrowly salient religious issues. By contrast, moderately religious regimes lack sufficient religious legitimacy to directly negotiate over both broadly and narrowly salient issues, rendering them particularly dispute-resolution avoidant. We test and generally confirm these propositions, utilizing new data measuring the religious salience of interstate territorial disputes in the post-Cold War era.","PeriodicalId":44399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Security Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140511936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0