Description du projet
Comprendre les facteurs de soutien aux missions militaires de l’ONU et de l’OTAN
Les partis nationaux et les parlementaires individuels adoptent souvent des positions différentes concernant l’ONU et l’OTAN. Le projet SUPPMIL, financé par l’UE, s’appuiera sur une approche multiméthodes pour expliquer ce phénomène, en combinant une analyse quantitative des textes et des études de cas. L’analyse quantitative des textes couvrira 30 ans de débats parlementaires au Canada, en Allemagne, en Italie, au Royaume-Uni et aux États-Unis, ainsi que les discussions au Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU et au Conseil de l’Atlantique Nord. SUPPMIL entend ainsi enrichir le débat théorique sur les facteurs de soutien aux missions militaires. Les études de cas portant sur deux missions de l’ONU menées en République démocratique du Congo et au Liban et deux missions de l’OTAN en Afghanistan et au Kosovo, apporteront de nouvelles connaissances sur la rhétorique et la posture adoptées par les États et les différentes parties.
Objectif
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.
Champ scientifique
Mots‑clés
Programme(s)
Régime de financement
MSCA-IF - Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowships (IF)Coordinateur
CV4 8UW COVENTRY
Royaume-Uni