France’s reluctant parliamentarisation of military deployments: the 2008 constitutional reform in practice

Ostermann, Falk

doi:10.1080/01402382.2016.1244751

Cited by 28 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The German Bundestag has ex ante approval rights for military missions due to a Federal Constitutional Court ruling in 1994 and has voted more than 140 times since, partly because extensions, changes in mandate or troop levels require parliamentary approval. The French parliament was only endowed with ex post voting rights on military operations through the constitutional reform of 2008 (Ostermann, 2017). In Spain, parliamentary control of military missions had become an issue in the wake of the 1999 Kosovo intervention, but it was only after the highly contested involvement of Spain in the 2003 Iraq war that an ex ante veto power was introduced, by means of an Organic Law, in 2005.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Party politics at the water’s edge: contestation of military operations in Europe

Wagner

Herranz-Surrallés

Kaarbo

et al. 2018

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contributes to current debates on the politicization of international politics by examining party-political contestation of peace and security missions. It is guided by two inter-related questions, (a) to what extent deployment decisions are contested amongst political parties and (b) what drives such contestation. We examine data from a new data set on parliamentary votes on deployment decisions in France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom and from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey. Against conventional wisdom and in an effort to address the often-overlooked role of political parties, we find that military deployments have been systematically contested amongst political parties across Europe. Further, we find that contestation is driven by the left/right axis, as opposed to newer cleavages captured here by the so-called gal/tan axis. We also find evidence that patterns of contestation depend on parties' positions in government or opposition, a factor we relate to bureaucratic and international pressures on the parties in office, and to political opportunities for opposition parties.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Party politics at the water’s edge: contestation of military operations in Europe

Wagner

Herranz-Surrallés

Kaarbo

et al. 2018

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many transition countries—including Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania—initially established firm parliamentary rights in security matters, only to curb these regulations during their North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) accession processes in the early 2000s (Cottey et al, 2002; Wagner et al, 2010). All of this led also to increasing research interest in the role that parliaments play when governments send troops abroad, and in democratic security policy more generally (Dieterich et al, 2015; Kesgin and Kaarbo, 2010; Ostermann, 2017; Peters and Wagner, 2011; Strong, 2015b).…”

Section: Current Research and Its Focus On Formal Legislative–executimentioning

confidence: 99%

Parliaments in security policy: Involvement, politicisation, and influence

Mello

Peters

2018

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While parliaments have long been neglected actors in the analysis of security policy, a research literature on the subject is growing. Current research is focused primarily on how parliaments, relying on formal legal competences, can constrain governmental policies. However, this research needs expansion in three areas. First, informal sources of parliamentary influence on security policy deserve more systematic attention as the significance of parliaments often hinges on contextual factors and individual decision-makers. Second, we still lack a systematic understanding of the effects of parliamentary involvement on security policy. Finally, the role of parliaments for the politics of security is almost completely uncharted territory. When parliaments become involved in security policy, does it foster transparency and contribute to the politicisation of security policy so that security policy becomes a 'normal' political issue? The article reviews current research, derives findings from the contributions to this Special Issue, and spells out their wider implications.

show abstract

“…This was the case for the deployment votes in Italy and for the votes in the UK's House of Commons on Iraq, Libya, and Syria (Mello, 2017;Coticchia and Vignoli, 2018;Strong, 2018). A score of 0 was assigned to deployment votes in France, where voting on military deployment is only required after 4 months, and to Belgium's parliamentary vote on the French-led operation Serval, which was an ex post legitimatization of a government's decision without parliament having an actual impact on the decision (Ostermann, 2017;Reykers and Fonck, 2018: 690).…”

Section: Divisiveness Deployment Decision and Parliamentary Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

When does politics stop at the water’s edge? A QCA of parliamentary consensus on military deployment decisions

Haesebrouck

Immerseel

2020

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do some military deployment decisions lead to high levels of political contestation, whereas others do not? Or, put differently, when does parliamentary consensus on the use of force abroad exist? In this article, we aim to answer this question by focusing on the varying levels of consensus in national parliaments when taking military deployment decisions. We do so by examining conditions that were derived from research on the domestic-level determinants of the use of force, parliamentary voting, and opposition behaviour. These conditions were included in an integrated theoretical framework, which we tested with fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. The results of our analysis show that the international legal status and the objectives of the military operation are of crucial importance for explaining the pattern of political contestation. However, domestic variables need to be taken into account as well to fully explain the level of political contestation of military deployment decisions.

show abstract

France’s reluctant parliamentarisation of military deployments: the 2008 constitutional reform in practice

Cited by 28 publications

References 29 publications

Party politics at the water’s edge: contestation of military operations in Europe

Party politics at the water’s edge: contestation of military operations in Europe

Parliaments in security policy: Involvement, politicisation, and influence

When does politics stop at the water’s edge? A QCA of parliamentary consensus on military deployment decisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About