Security Studies最新文献_第4页

Military Regimes and Resistance to Nuclear Weapons Development 军事体制与对核武器发展的抵制

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2197621

Lisa Langdon Koch

引用次数: 0

Madman or Mad Genius? The International Benefits and Domestic Costs of the Madman Strategy 疯子还是疯子天才?疯子战略的国际收益和国内成本

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2197619

J. Schwartz

引用次数: 0

Stuck on the Left with You: The Limits of Partisanship in US Foreign Policy 与你一起被困在左翼:美国外交政策中的党派界限

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2200971

Emma Ashford

{"title":"Stuck on the Left with You: The Limits of Partisanship in US Foreign Policy","authors":"Emma Ashford","doi":"10.1080/09636412.2023.2200971","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2023.2200971","url":null,"abstract":"Van Jackson’s “Left of Liberal Internationalism” is a wonderfully clear effort to construct an intellectual scaffolding around the various forms of progressive thinking on foreign policy. This kind of exercise is valuable, as policy-relevant battles about US foreign policy typically take place in disparate venues and media: speeches, panels, magazines, and even across social media; this makes it difficult to build a comprehensive picture of how America’s major political parties are evolving on foreign policy over time. And while similar studies have been done in the past, particularly on the varieties of conservative foreign policy found in the Republican Party,1 Jackson’s article is the first to really explore the increasingly influential progressive wing of the Democratic Party in the context of foreign policy. Likewise, the article does a service in translating often-quixotic political debates over foreign policy into more scholarly language and concepts, allowing researchers to better situate these emerging debates in the canon of existing grand strategic debates.2 Even as an active participant in the policy debates over US foreign policy,3 I found Jackson’s article to be extremely helpful in clearly delineating the different arguments within the progressive movement, outlining how far debate has come, and showing where it still needs progress. With that in mind, however, I think the","PeriodicalId":47478,"journal":{"name":"Security Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"382 - 388"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46967764","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Progressivism and Grand Strategy: An Exchange – The Author Replies 进步主义与大战略:一种交流——作者答

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2200974

Van Jackson

{"title":"Progressivism and Grand Strategy: An Exchange – The Author Replies","authors":"Van Jackson","doi":"10.1080/09636412.2023.2200974","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2023.2200974","url":null,"abstract":"Bringing left-progressive views of the world into dialogue with security studies makes us better analysts by exposing both perspectives’ limitations and blind spots. It helps us discover areas of common ground. And it permits greater specificity about the nature and severity of policy disagreements between those who retain progressive or social democratic political commitments and those whose scope of work concentrates primarily on optimizing the national security state. Nevertheless, any attempt to bridge such distant worlds was bound to generate at least as much controversy as insight. Accordingly, the responses to my research illuminate a mix of fruitful agreements, irreducible differences, and promising avenues for future research. I am grateful for all of it. Rather than respond to every point made across five very different interjections, I will clarify some key elements in my original analysis, as well as some aspects of left-progressive politics that lend themselves to misunderstanding. First, progressive grand strategies are internally coherent logics—not people—describing different ways of using policy to realize peace, democracy, and equality. Second, all grand strategy is worldmaking, and all security analysis has political consequences. Third, progressivism in US foreign policy must be a contrast with—not merely a complement to—US liberal internationalism.","PeriodicalId":47478,"journal":{"name":"Security Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"404 - 412"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43139485","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Fears of Revolution and International Cooperation:The Concert of Europe and the Transformation of European Politics 对革命的恐惧与国际合作：欧洲的协调与欧洲政治的转型

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2200202

Chad E. Nelson

引用次数: 0

Domestic Legitimacy and Progressive Grand Strategies in US Foreign Policy 美国外交政策中的国内合法性与进步大战略

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2200973

C. W. Walldorf

{"title":"Domestic Legitimacy and Progressive Grand Strategies in US Foreign Policy","authors":"C. W. Walldorf","doi":"10.1080/09636412.2023.2200973","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2023.2200973","url":null,"abstract":"Van Jackson’s “Left of Liberal Internationalism: Grand Strategies within Progressive Foreign Policy Thought” offers an exceptionally clear and fascinating picture of three different threads of grand strategic thinking— progressive pragmatism, antihegemonism, and peacemaking—that exist in current progressive policy circles. All three approaches share a commitment to reduced militarism in US foreign policy (for example, ending the force-based approach to counterterrorism), but each is distinct. Pragmatists advocate strengthening democratic alliances, US leadership in regional order-building, sanctioning autocrats, and achieving greater equity in Global North-South economic relations. Antihegemonists advocate restraint: a full drawdown of US military forces worldwide, an end to all alliances (including the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)), and brokered spheres of influence with China and Russia. Finally, peacemakers advocate multilateral security arrangements, unilateral US demilitarization to stem security dilemmas, and bureaucratic changes to advance peace. This essay does not critique Jackson’s impressive analysis of progressivism. Instead, it focuses on the issue of feasibility. Alexander L. George argues that in the United States, domestic legitimacy (or, “a climate of acceptance”) is invaluable to sustain “a coherent and consistent” grand strategy amid the vicissitudes common to policymaking in democratic states. 1 Which or what parts of the progressive grand strategies Jackson identifies are more (or less) likely to gain domestic legitimacy, and with that shape US foreign policy going forward?","PeriodicalId":47478,"journal":{"name":"Security Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"396 - 403"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42510510","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Delineating Progressive Grand Strategies 描绘进步的大战略

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2200970

Daniel Bessner

引用次数: 0

Wishful Strategies 一厢情愿的策略

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2200969

Tarak Barkawi

{"title":"Wishful Strategies","authors":"Tarak Barkawi","doi":"10.1080/09636412.2023.2200969","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2023.2200969","url":null,"abstract":"Van Jackson’s thoughtful article “Left of Liberal Internationalism” identifies three “grand strategies,” each of which reflects a strand of progressive foreign policy thinking among the contemporary US Left. For each, he connects an analysis of the global sources of insecurity with a set of guiding policy prescriptions for the United States derived from progressive ideals. Then, with an astute eye, he offers an analysis of the risks involved for each paradigm. However, on offer here is less strategy and more progressive political imagination, preferred images of the world and of America—in short, ideology. This does not differentiate progressive grand strategy from the mainstream strategic thought with which Jackson is trying to dialogue. The Anglo-American tradition of grand strategy, as we find it in international relations (IR), valorizes the United States and its role in world history. Cold War realism, like liberal internationalism, reproduced idealized images of the United States as a democratic bulwark against totalitarianism and an enlightened hegemon. Though powerful states can often afford to maintain some degree of illusion, this is not a particularly strategic way of going about things, at least from a classical, Clausewitzian perspective.1 Strategy demands above all the gimlet eye: for oneself, for one’s opponents and allies, and for the situation at hand. Part of the problem with thinking about strategy in mainstream IR is that the social and political context—the international system of states—is largely taken for granted. So too, for the most part, are Eurocentric historiographies.2 For liberals and realists, these entail rosy conceptions of liberal democracy and of capitalism, as well as triumphalist accounts of the US role in the twentieth century. Jackson wants to move beyond this. His progressive approaches purport to take seriously a domestic history","PeriodicalId":47478,"journal":{"name":"Security Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"371 - 377"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46930295","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

China and the Logic of Illiberal Hegemony 中国与非自由主义霸权的逻辑

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2178963

Darren J. Lim, G. Ikenberry

引用次数: 0

Who Is Getting Nuked? Nuclear Taboo, Adversary Types, and Atomic Dispositions 谁在被裸体？核禁忌、敌对类型和原子处置

IF 1.8 2区社会学

Security Studies Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2023.2178968

Yogesh Joshi

引用次数: 0