Critique internationale - Content
No Abstract
No Abstract
[The Evolution of the UN: Competition and Integration]
In pace with the erratic growth of international cooperation, the United Nations has experienced complex change in many areas. The growth, diversification and competition of the numerous state and non-state actors involved in its activities have led to the establishment of new mechanisms and the emergence of new practices. These varied changes have nevertheless proven to be more gradual and iterated than likely to overturn the international balance of power. Given the divergences and tensions inherent to a universal, decentralized and multi-functional institution, the UN’s effectiveness as a framework for political action varies considerably and it mainly operates as a forum for exchange and debate. It nevertheless contributes to the slow integration of states and societies at the international level.
[The World Bank, between Transformation and Resilience]
Since its creation, the role and mission of the World Bank have gradually expanded, allowing it to acquire its present leadership role in development policy. Faced with the crisis of legitimacy of the 1990s, this institution implemented profound, continuous changes. The promotion of new poverty reduction strategies that insist on the principle of policy appropriation by national actors and, more generally, take political economy and institutions into account constitutes a major turning point. There are nevertheless real limits to the application of these strategic changes. Indeed, the difficulty had by the World Bank in carrying out genuine reform is the result of structural constraints: the institution’s dominance by the United States and other large industrialized countries hinders the development of internal government and the objectives of its three principal missions (finance, development aid and development research) contradict one another. Moreover, the hegemonic position the World Bank has created for itself as well as its exclusively economistic and orthodox vision ensure that the new themes and approaches it adopts are systematically refashioned in keeping with the dominant paradigm of the market. While this institution has shown a formidable capacity to stimulate innovative orientations, it thus struggles to realize them in practice.
[Is NATO Still NATO?]
NATO’s survival following the end of the Cold War contradicts the postulate of realists, according to whom military alliances are destined to collapse with the disappearance of the threat they are intended to counter. The Organization has even made a fundamental value out of its ability to transform itself, an ability that seems to have been demonstrated by its unprecedented humanitarian and military operations and its enlargement to include new members. The central dynamic at work here is the transformation of an alliance defending Europe and North America into a crisis management organization that above all intervenes outside of its territory. Yet what permits NATO to survive is the institutionalization of certain arrangements favoring stability: a permanent bureaucracy and command structure, the relative homogeneity of its members (which are now all democracies) and a decision-making process marked by the preeminence of the United States and respect for sovereignty by the principle of unanimity. The Organization’s transformation is nevertheless limited by divergences within its ever-growing and more diverse membership and by the inertia of the organizational apparatus. Studying change within NATO shows that the various types of change that can affect an international organization – its structure, membership and normative and cognitive dimensions – do not necessarily go without saying.
[The European Union Development Policy: Reforms and Europeanization]
An incarnation of the capacity and values of the EU, development policy has since 1957 become a central instrument of international action and is the source of more than half of all public aid for world development. Yet “European development policy” in fact covers a system of “27+1” policies: the bilateral policies of the 27 Member States + the policy conducted by the European Commission on behalf of the EU. Though ostensibly governed by shared competence and an obligation of complementarity, coordination and coherence (the “3c’s”), this system has long been a dead letter. In the past few years, the “27+1” nevertheless seem to have travelled down the path of Europeanization at the political, practical and financial levels at once. It is thus worth analyzing the dynamics presiding over this significant but laborious change, the inherent limits of which reflect the uncertainty of the European undertaking.
[The Scottish National Party from 2007 to 2011: Still an Independentist Party?]
In May 2011, the Scottish National Party (SNP) was elected to the head of the regional government of Scotland with an absolute majority. This victory marked the end of an ambiguous period for Scottish nationalism, that of its 2007-2011 term in government Weakened by having to govern as a minority within the Scottish Parliament, the Party was unable to put forward a law authorizing a referendum on independence. The crisis of 2008, what’s more, made it seem unlikely that an independent Scotland could survive in a context of generalized economic and financial collapse. As a result, a significant portion of public opinion came to believe that the nationalist party was in the process of abandoning its historic cause. Yet it seems that the SNP behaved in an entirely coherent fashion by remaining faithful to its “gradualist” strategy, the mainstay of the party line since the 1970s. Rejecting revolutionary strategies for acquiring sovereignty, it has above all counted on obtaining a genuine majority. The resulting doubts as to the validity of the separatist project calls for reconsidering the way in which “gradualism” historically established itself within the party and the manner in which the experience of holding power led this strategy to be adapted, particularly during the formation of a minority government
[Voices of Belonging: Interpreting “Ethnic” Votes in Bulgaria and Romania]
What considerations explain the voting behavior of supporters of political parties such as the Movement for Rights and Liberties (MRF), which seeks to represent the Turks and Muslims of Bulgaria, or the Democratic Union of Hungarians in Romania (UDMR)? In contrast to an approach that treats declared ethnicity as an independent variable with measurable electoral effects, the authors examine, on the one hand, the historically situated and territorialized institutional and political contexts in which identity repertories (religion, language, culture, etc.) were constructed as politically relevant by candidates and/or their voters and, on the other hand, the meanings attached by the latter to their choices. Comparison suggests that support for “minority” candidates does not necessarily entail full support for a party’s identity-based platform and even less a homogenous definition of belonging. It also underscores the importance of understanding the relationship of the act of voting to the construction of the multi-scalar identifications (local, regional, national, European…) that variously engage kin states by redeploying relations between territories, citizenship and voting.
[What Is the Point of United Russia? Conservatism and Modernization in the Ruling Party’s Discourse of Legitimization]
With a majority in the Russian Parliament since 2003, the representatives of the ruling United Russia Party justify their domination by reference to the pressing need to strengthen the state. By presenting the stabilization of political life as the sine qua non of the country’s modernization, they define themselves as “conservatives” and frequently refer to foreign (and, in particular, European) political parties. In addition to helping legitimate limitations on pluralism, this self-proclaimed proximity to the state contributes to determining the place of United Russia and its representatives in the political system. By analyzing the content and uses of these legitimation strategies, we underscore the way in which the discourse employed by representatives of United Russia constitutes an attempt to normatively define the political activity in which they themselves are involved. Furthermore, assertions of kinship with certain Western parties invites one to consider the way in which, setting aside static and normative distinctions between regimes, processes for limiting pluralism in Russia contribute to reformulating politics in terms of good governance, modernization and state efficiency.
État de littérature. Déconstruire pour dénoncer : la traite des êtres humains en débat
Marion Fourcade, Economists and Societies : Discipline and Profession in the United States, Britain, and France, 1890s to 1990s. Princeton/Oxford, Princeton University Press, 2009, XXI-388 pages.
Stene Epstein, Inclusion : The Politics of Difference in Medical Research. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 2007. 413 pages.
Evan S. Lieberman, Boundaries of Contagion : How Ethnic Politics Have Shaped Government Responses to AIDS. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2009, 346 pages.
