The German politics of war: Kunduz and the war in Afghanistan

This article analyses the way in which Germany's participation in the international intervention in Afghanistan has shaped and transformed the country's politics of defence and deriving policies. It argues that in the wake of operational challenges posed by the insurgency in northern Afghanistan since 2007, and in particular the increasing rate of German combat fatalities, established post‐Cold War dogmas of German politics are becoming subject to erosion. Developments in the Kunduz region of northern Afghanistan, with the tanker bombing of 4 September 2009 as its apex, have had a catalyst function in this process. In particular, strategic, operational and tactical requirements for counterinsurgency operations have had significant politico‐strategic repercussions for the country's defence and security policy more generally. As a result, in recent years the Bundeswehr has begun to undergo a far‐reaching structural process of military adaptation and innovation. The article explains and analyses this phenomenon of political change and military learning in the context of political paralysis.     

Partisan politics and the public sphere: The civil war north

The Civil War North presents an interesting case study of the relationship between a highly politicized public sphere and partisan electoral politics. Although the two‐party system remained intact throughout the war, the concept and practice of partisanship was challenged by the social experience of Northerners who ‘acted politically’ when they took part in the war effort. The creation of a mass citizen army and the mobilization of women and men on the home front meant that parties lost their function as the crucial mediating channel between citizen and government. The more that politics mattered, the less partisanship seemed to be relevant. The war exposed the latent non‐partisan political energies of Northern society. These conclusions bolster the arguments of those scholars who, questioning whether partisanship was as deep or as widespread as previously supposed, have begun to suggest that the ‘party period paradigm’ does not capture the entirety of the nineteenth‐century political experience.     

Executive diplomacy: multilateralism, unilateralism and managing American power

The clash between unilateralists and multilateralists dominates contemporary debate, with many assuming that American foreign policy must result from nothing more or less than a tug of war between the two. The practicalities of diplomacy at a juncture of competing viewpoints on American power reveal, however, that this old dichotomy simply has lost steam as a policy–making engine. Springing straight from today's front pages and centred in the transatlantic conversation over America's role in the world, this article throws into question how America and its allies grapple for international initiative. Managing American power demands a new concept—anchored as much in the social arena of consensus formation described by Jürgen Habermas as in the experience of corporate officers leading a large business. The article argues that the real world challenges facing America as unrivalled superpower have strained the old approach, and asks if managing American influence has to continue as an either/or choice between ‘going it alone’ or waiting for others to recognize new threats. Or might it instead transform into a quest for integrating key constituencies behind practical action?     

The Atomic Marshall Plan: Atoms for Peace,British diplomacy and civil nuclear power

British policy towards President Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace speech was characterised by ambiguity. The world's third nuclear power, Britain sought to re-establish nuclear cooperation with the United States. Multilateral nuclear diplomacy was of secondary importance. This position is exemplified in Britain's conflicting attitude to the International Atomic Energy Agency which oscillated from warm enthusiasm to qualified rejection before settling on a policy of grudging acceptance. The paper focusses on British reactions to Eisenhower's proposal and shows that the fate of the agency was secondary to the ultimate aim of restoring the nuclear relationship with Washington which was realised in 1954 resulting in a British volte-face concerning the agency's future.     

Financial order and world politics: crisis, change and continuity

Many insist that the world economy today is in the grip of the most severe financial crisis since 1931. Although the origins of this crisis are in dispute, the extent and scale of the changes prompted by it are becoming clear. Among these changes are a recalibration of the relationship between public and private authority, a reconfiguration of the regulatory responsibilities and capacities of the state with respect to the financial system, and a rebalancing of relations of power among states. While the financial crisis has generated points of stress along all of these axes of change, we should be wary of expecting an entirely new global financial order to emerge from the carnage. The complex links between financial order and world politics suggest that this financial crisis will result in an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary transformation in the world's financial order.     

The Gulf war and the new world order: Economic dimensions of a problematic relationship

This paper investigates the durability of the economic underpinnings of the ‘new world order’ allegedly conceived in the Gulf war. Four substantive arguments are advanced: that the mechanism for allied burden‐sharing born in the Gulf war is inferior to its antecedents and inherently more political; that the historically acute economic vulnerability of America's allies to higher oil prices no longer exists; that the prospects for stable and low oil prices through the long run have not been enhanced; and that significant political opportunities for stability in the oil market are evaporating.     

The unintended consequences of emergency food aid: neutrality,sovereignty and politics in the Syrian civil war, 2012–15

This article dissects the role of emergency food aid during the current Syrian conflict. Drawing on Séverine Autesserre's concept of frames and Giorgio Agamben's theory of sovereignty, we argue that the neutrality frame, which undergirds the majority of humanitarian relief efforts in Syria, obfuscates the impact of emergency food aid, both on sovereign power relations and local political dynamics. While neutrality appears benign, it has had a tangible impact on the Syrian civil war. Through close scrutiny of various case‐studies, the article traces how humanitarian efforts reinforce the bases of sovereign politics while contributing to a host of what Mariella Pandolfi (1998) terms ‘mobile sovereignties’. In the process, humanitarian organizations reaffirm sovereign power while also engaging in similar activities. We then analyse how and why ostensibly neutral emergency food aid has unintentionally assisted the Assad regime by facilitating its control over food, which it uses to buttress support and foster compliance. By bringing external resources into life‐or‐death situations characterized by scarcity, aid agencies have become implicated in the conflict's inner workings. The article concludes by examining the political and military impact of emergency food assistance during the Syrian conflict, before discussing possible implications for the humanitarian enterprise more broadly.     

The transformation of diplomacy: mysteries, insurgencies and public relations

There has recently been a resurgence of interest in the art of diplomacy, fuelled by the growing popularity of the idea of 'soft power'. This article reviews three books key to this revival, all of which argue that a transformed and revitalized diplomacy can and should play a positive role in international politics. One calls for diplomats to overcome their traditional reserve and become 'guerrillas' fighting for human security, peace and development; another for a broader and deeper engagement with 'public diplomacy'—the practice of speaking to foreign peoples rather than just foreign sovereigns. The last favours a return to inherited diplomatic wisdom now half-forgotten. While welcoming this renewed concern for diplomacy, this review article argues that its place in contemporary international politics is perhaps less secure than the works reviewed allow. The 'management of legitimacy'—the central task of diplomats—is a much more difficult task than is often acknowledged.     

精英、舆论与外交:华盛顿会议期间的国民外交代表

1921年底,余日章和蒋梦麟作为国民外交代表参与华盛顿会议。他们对中国政府代表团进行舆论监督,力促政府代表早日提出山东问题。当会外谈判成为现实后,他们又力促政府代表早日解决山东问题;并利用各种渠道构建一个舆论宣传网络,努力维护中国的国家形象,揭露日本侵略中国权利的实际情形。余日章、蒋梦麟在华盛顿会议期间的国民外交活动堪称1920年代初期中国精英利用公众舆论影响政府外交的一个典型。