Counterterrorism and International Power Relations: The EU, ASEAN and Hegemonic Global Governance
This monograph presents an assessment of the counter-terrorism policies of the US, EU and ASEAN by conducting a broader analysis of the causes of participation within ‘hegemonic governance’. Global governance is generally conceptualised in highly normatively laden terms, implying heterarchy and the near total absence of realism’s structural effects on the actors. In opposition to this, I assume that global governance bears elements of hierarchy, hence ‘hegemonic governance’, which influences its constitutive processes. Participation in the institutions, regimes and policies of hegemonic governance, I argue, is dependent on structural features of the current international system (i.e. unipolarity) and the application of dominant power via force, coercion and influence (i.e. hegemony) within it. Participation with respect to the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), for example, depends on the dominance, authority and legitimacy of the US (both ASEAN and EU), on asymmetric interdependence with the US (as in the case of ASEAN), on the discursive influence of the US (particularly in the EU), and probably on some open as well as informal pressure (both cases). Apart from questioning the causes of participation in hegemonic governance, this research is taking a critical outlook on the realisation of hegemony in the GWOT.
Beyer, C. Counterterrorism and International Power Relations: The EU, ASEAN and Hegemonic Global Governance. The University of Hull
|Book Type||Authored Book|
|Deposit Date||Dec 19, 2014|
|Peer Reviewed||Not Peer Reviewed|
|Book Title||Counterterrorism and International Power Relations: The EU, ASEAN and Hegemonic Global Governance|
|Keywords||REF 2014 submission|
This file is under embargo due to copyright reasons.
You might also like
The battle deaths of peace time: Macro-political, -economic and –social causes of suicides
Abolishing the security dilemma: Why we need to integrate the militaries
Why we need to establish international political psychology
Peace in international relations