Analysis of Local Ownership as Governmentality in CSDP Interventions. The Case of EUCAP Nestor.
Translated title
Analysis of Local Ownership as Governmentality in CSDP Interventions. The Case of EUCAP Nestor
Author
Ivarsen, Kirstine Emilie Rudbeck
Term
4. term
Publication year
2020
Pages
45
Abstract
Siden begyndelsen af 2000'erne er ideen om lokalt ejerskab — at mennesker i de berørte samfund bør forme og lede udviklings- og fredsindsatser — blevet central i international politik. EU fremhæver ofte dette princip i sine erklæringer, men har haft svært ved at omsætte det til praksis. Med EUCAP Nestor som eksempel argumenterer afhandlingen for, at afstanden mellem retorik og implementering primært skyldes den politiske rationalitet i avancerede demokratier, snarere end forhold i værtsstaterne. Undersøgelsen bygger på dokumentanalyse med en foucauldiansk genealogisk tilgang, der kortlægger, hvordan ideer og magtforhold opstår over tid, og en analyse af 'praksisregimer', der ser på de rutiner og regler, som styrer handling. Tre resultater præsenteres. For det første genlyder princippet om lokalt ejerskab kolonitidens indirekte styre. For det andet bliver lokalt ejerskab i praksis operationaliseret gennem en udefra drevet top-down-tilgang. For det tredje hæmmes EU's bestræbelser af politikken og beslutningsprocedurerne i den fælles sikkerheds- og forsvarspolitik (CSDP). Samlet forklarer afhandlingen, hvorfor et bredt anerkendt princip svækkes i implementeringen.
Since the early 2000s, the idea of local ownership — that people in affected societies should shape and lead development and peacebuilding — has moved to the center of international policy. The EU strongly endorses this principle in its public statements, yet has struggled to put it into practice. Using the case of EUCAP Nestor, this thesis argues that the gap between rhetoric and implementation is driven mainly by the political rationality of advanced democracies rather than by host states. The study is based on document analysis using a Foucauldian genealogical approach, which traces how ideas and power relations take shape over time, and a 'regime of practices' analysis, which examines the routines and rules that guide action. Three findings follow. First, the contemporary language of local ownership echoes colonial-era indirect rule. Second, in practice local ownership is operationalized through externally driven, top-down procedures. Third, the EU's efforts to implement local ownership are constrained by the politics and policy-making procedures of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). Together, these findings help explain why a widely supported principle is diluted in implementation.
[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]
Keywords
Documents