安全伙伴关系中的资源调动:解释欧盟与非洲联盟伙伴关系中的合作与胁迫

IF 1.9 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Ueli Staeger
{"title":"安全伙伴关系中的资源调动:解释欧盟与非洲联盟伙伴关系中的合作与胁迫","authors":"Ueli Staeger","doi":"10.1177/00108367221147785","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Security partnerships between unequal partners walk a fine line between mutually beneficial cooperation and coercion. This article theorizes resource provision in security partnerships in which a funder substantively supports a recipient organization. Specifically, I develop an argument concerning the effect of principal–agent interactions in security partnerships on the recipient’s agency through mechanisms of agenda-setting and capacity-building. The European Union’s (EU) peace and security partnership with the African Union (AU) illustrates the contentious politics of resource mobilization in security partnerships, and how these politics affect the secretariat of the recipient organization. The article arrives at the rather optimistic conclusion that the EU is a generous partner with an explicit goal of cooperative engagement. Furthermore, opportunities for coercion are minimized by the EU’s internal bureaucratic obstacles, the AU’s strategic sequencing of the resource mobilization process, and the overarching post-coloniality of the partnership. However, occasional episodes of coercive EU behaviour have led to considerable tensions in the partnership. These findings add important contrast to postcolonial critiques of AU funding: the AU Commission exercises considerable organizational agency, which relegates the EU – despite being a large payer – to the role of a small player, particularly when it comes to directly influencing the AU.","PeriodicalId":47286,"journal":{"name":"Cooperation and Conflict","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resource mobilization in security partnerships: Explaining cooperation and coercion in the EU’s partnership with the African Union\",\"authors\":\"Ueli Staeger\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00108367221147785\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Security partnerships between unequal partners walk a fine line between mutually beneficial cooperation and coercion. This article theorizes resource provision in security partnerships in which a funder substantively supports a recipient organization. Specifically, I develop an argument concerning the effect of principal–agent interactions in security partnerships on the recipient’s agency through mechanisms of agenda-setting and capacity-building. The European Union’s (EU) peace and security partnership with the African Union (AU) illustrates the contentious politics of resource mobilization in security partnerships, and how these politics affect the secretariat of the recipient organization. The article arrives at the rather optimistic conclusion that the EU is a generous partner with an explicit goal of cooperative engagement. Furthermore, opportunities for coercion are minimized by the EU’s internal bureaucratic obstacles, the AU’s strategic sequencing of the resource mobilization process, and the overarching post-coloniality of the partnership. However, occasional episodes of coercive EU behaviour have led to considerable tensions in the partnership. These findings add important contrast to postcolonial critiques of AU funding: the AU Commission exercises considerable organizational agency, which relegates the EU – despite being a large payer – to the role of a small player, particularly when it comes to directly influencing the AU.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47286,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cooperation and Conflict\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cooperation and Conflict\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221147785\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cooperation and Conflict","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367221147785","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

不平等伙伴之间的安全伙伴关系在互利合作和胁迫之间徘徊。本文对资助者实质性支持受援国组织的安全伙伴关系中的资源提供进行了理论分析。具体而言,我提出了一个论点,即安全伙伴关系中的委托人-代理人互动通过议程制定和能力建设机制对接受者的机构产生的影响。欧洲联盟(欧盟)与非洲联盟(非盟)的和平与安全伙伴关系说明了安全伙伴关系中有争议的资源调动政治,以及这些政治如何影响受援国组织的秘书处。这篇文章得出了一个相当乐观的结论,即欧盟是一个慷慨的合作伙伴,有着明确的合作目标。此外,由于欧盟内部的官僚障碍、非盟对资源调动过程的战略排序以及伙伴关系的后殖民主义,胁迫的机会被最小化。然而,偶尔发生的欧盟胁迫行为导致了伙伴关系的相当紧张。这些发现与后殖民时代对非盟资金的批评形成了重要对比:非盟委员会行使着相当大的组织机构,尽管欧盟是一个大的支付国,但它将欧盟降级为一个小角色,尤其是在直接影响非盟时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resource mobilization in security partnerships: Explaining cooperation and coercion in the EU’s partnership with the African Union
Security partnerships between unequal partners walk a fine line between mutually beneficial cooperation and coercion. This article theorizes resource provision in security partnerships in which a funder substantively supports a recipient organization. Specifically, I develop an argument concerning the effect of principal–agent interactions in security partnerships on the recipient’s agency through mechanisms of agenda-setting and capacity-building. The European Union’s (EU) peace and security partnership with the African Union (AU) illustrates the contentious politics of resource mobilization in security partnerships, and how these politics affect the secretariat of the recipient organization. The article arrives at the rather optimistic conclusion that the EU is a generous partner with an explicit goal of cooperative engagement. Furthermore, opportunities for coercion are minimized by the EU’s internal bureaucratic obstacles, the AU’s strategic sequencing of the resource mobilization process, and the overarching post-coloniality of the partnership. However, occasional episodes of coercive EU behaviour have led to considerable tensions in the partnership. These findings add important contrast to postcolonial critiques of AU funding: the AU Commission exercises considerable organizational agency, which relegates the EU – despite being a large payer – to the role of a small player, particularly when it comes to directly influencing the AU.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Published for over 40 years, the aim of Cooperation and Conflict is to promote research on and understanding of international relations. It believes in the deeds of academic pluralism and thus does not represent any specific methodology, approach, tradition or school. The mission of the journal is to meet the demands of the scholarly community having an interest in international studies (for details, see the statement "From the Editors" in Vol. 40, No. 3, September 2005). The editors especially encourage submissions contributing new knowledge of the field and welcome innovative, theory-aware and critical approaches. First preference will continue to be given to articles that have a Nordic and European focus. Cooperation and Conflict strictly adheres to a double-blind reviewing policy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信