Junior allies in wars of choice: Party politics and role conceptions in Danish and Romanian decisions on the Iraq War
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Junior allies in wars of choice : Party politics and role conceptions in Danish and Romanian decisions on the Iraq War. / Baciu, Cornelia; Wivel, Anders.
I: European Journal of International Security, Bind 9, Nr. 2, 01.05.2024, s. 241-262.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Junior allies in wars of choice
T2 - Party politics and role conceptions in Danish and Romanian decisions on the Iraq War
AU - Baciu, Cornelia
AU - Wivel, Anders
PY - 2024/5/1
Y1 - 2024/5/1
N2 - When and how do party politics matter in junior allies’ decisions to engage in multinational military operations? Developing a new role theory model of party politics and multinational military operations, we put forward a two-level argument. First, we argue that the rationale for military action is defined in a contest between political parties with expectations of what constitutes the proper purpose (constitutive roles) and functions (functional roles) of the state. Second, we hold that material and ontological insecurities reduce political space for contestation and debate, but that junior allies tend to focus on role demands for ‘good states’ and ‘good allies’ rather than the nature and aim of the military operation. To unpack our argument, we analyse the debate among political parties in Romania and Denmark leading up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Concluding our analysis, we outline the implications for the changing security order and current debates in NATO member states on how to respond to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
AB - When and how do party politics matter in junior allies’ decisions to engage in multinational military operations? Developing a new role theory model of party politics and multinational military operations, we put forward a two-level argument. First, we argue that the rationale for military action is defined in a contest between political parties with expectations of what constitutes the proper purpose (constitutive roles) and functions (functional roles) of the state. Second, we hold that material and ontological insecurities reduce political space for contestation and debate, but that junior allies tend to focus on role demands for ‘good states’ and ‘good allies’ rather than the nature and aim of the military operation. To unpack our argument, we analyse the debate among political parties in Romania and Denmark leading up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Concluding our analysis, we outline the implications for the changing security order and current debates in NATO member states on how to respond to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
KW - Faculty of Humanities
KW - Parliamentary debates
KW - Iraq War
KW - Romania
KW - Denmark
KW - Oversight
KW - Foreign Policy
KW - Faculty of Social Sciences
KW - Parliament
KW - War
KW - Political parties
KW - Denmark
KW - Transatlantic relations
KW - ontological security
KW - role theory
KW - Romania
KW - Iraq war
U2 - 10.1017/eis.2023.33
DO - 10.1017/eis.2023.33
M3 - Journal article
VL - 9
SP - 241
EP - 262
JO - European Journal of International Security
JF - European Journal of International Security
SN - 2057-5637
IS - 2
ER -
ID: 384833613