Project description
Factors of support for UN and Nato military missions
National parties and individual parliamentarians often adopt different positions regarding the UN and NATO. The EU-funded SUPPMIL project will employ a multi-method approach to explain this, combining quantitative texts analysis and case studies investigation. The quantitative texts analysis covers 30 years of parliamentary debates in Canada, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States, and discussions at the UN Security Council and the North Atlantic Council. It aims to enrich the theoretical debate on the factors of support for military missions. The case studies on two UN missions, in DR Congo and Lebanon, and two NATO missions, in Afghanistan and Kosovo, will deliver new knowledge about states and parties’ rhetoric and behaviour.
Objective
Why do national political parties and individual members of parliament (MPs) adopt different attitudes towards UN and NATO operations? To tackle this question, the project adopts a multi-method approach and brings together quantitative text analysis and case-studies investigation. First, the quantitative text analysis addresses thirty years of parliamentary debates in Canada, Germany, Italy, UK, and US, and discussions in the UN Security Council (UNSC) and in the North Atlantic Council. Second, the project entails case studies on two UN missions, the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the DR Congo, and the UN Interim Force in Lebanon and two NATO missions, Kosovo and Afghanistan. Results of the multi-method analysis enrich the theoretical debate about the factors that explain levels of support for military missions: the elaboration and the empirical testing of two unified theories for MPs and political parties’ positions on armed interventions abroad is a key innovative contribution. Second, the case-studies analysis provides novel insights about states and parties’ rhetoric and behaviour, contributing to relevant academic debates on international norms, rhetorical political analysis, and organised hypocrisy. The theoretical implications range from the political salience of different missions to the discrepancies of Foreign Policy positions over the domestic-international divide. In addition, the project provides significant methodological improvements. The combination of quantitative with qualitative text-analysis tools offers intriguing insights about the strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches and about the potential for their interaction. Finally, the project aims at refining the rigorousness of Bayesian process tracing, building systematic rules to assign different causal weights to different observations. In this context, the employment of MPs’ personal characteristics and institutional roles to establish such rules seems a promising path.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/euroscivoc.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/euroscivoc.
- humanitieslanguages and literatureliterature studiesliterary genresessays
- social sciencespolitical sciencespolitical policiesforeign policy
- social scienceseconomics and businessbusiness and managementemployment
You need to log in or register to use this function
We are sorry... an unexpected error occurred during execution.
You need to be authenticated. Your session might have expired.
Thank you for your feedback. You will soon receive an email to confirm the submission. If you have selected to be notified about the reporting status, you will also be contacted when the reporting status will change.
Keywords
Programme(s)
Funding Scheme
MSCA-IF - Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowships (IF)Coordinator
CV4 8UW COVENTRY
United Kingdom