What are you looking for?

What are you looking for?

Gefangen in der Eskalationsspirale

Abschreckung soll den Gegner zu Zurückhaltung bewegen – kann aber als Aggression wahrgenommen werden. Gibt es einen Ausweg aus dem Dilemma?
FES
security policy
Peace and Security
Robin Schreiner | Unsplash

Das Konstrukt der Abschreckung soll Eskalationen verhindern. In der Realität kann es jedoch leicht passieren, dass das Gegenteil geschieht und ein Konflikt eskaliert. In seinem Beitrag im Journal für Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft setzt sich Johann Ivanov, Entsandter der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung bei FriEnt, mit diesem Dilemma auseinander.

Am Beispiel der Konfrontation zwischen der NATO und Russland erläutert er, wie Abschreckungsmaßnahmen schlimmstenfalls einen entgegengesetzten Effekt erzielen könnten. Er plädiert dafür, in der sich zunehmend verschärfenden sicherheitspolitischen Lage keine vorschnellen Entscheidungen zu treffen. Die Komplexität der Lage sowie kurzfristige und langfristige Entwicklungen müssten ausreichend reflektiert werden.

Author

No authors assigned to this post.

References

Gefangen in der Eskalationsspirale

Journal für Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, 28.11.2024

Related articles

“Security is more than just military strength”: Catholic Responses to Armament and Crisis

The Katholikentag in Würzburg has shown that peace, security and development go hand in hand. In this interview, Dorothee Klüppel, a member of FriEnt’s Steering Committee and Head of the Africa/Middle East Department at Misereor, explains why security is more than just military strength, why justice, democracy and international cooperation are key prerequisites for sustainable peace and what special role church actors play in this – particularly in times of rearmament and geopolitical tensions.

The Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus at a Turning Point

How can the Humanitarian-Development-Peace (HDP) nexus effectively deliver on its promises amid mounting crises, shrinking resources and rising political tension? Lena Pönisch, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), shares the key findings of an international reflection process and explains why, today more than ever, better political, institutional and financial frameworks are needed to achieve joint impact in crisis contexts.

From Ambition to Inaction: Climate Talks Struggle to Deliver Implementation

The intersessional climate negotiations (SB64) in Bonn concluded with sobering results. Climate justice was a central theme in many discussions and rounds of negotiations, but issues surrounding climate finance prevented an agreement from being reached. Negotiations on the global adaptation target, for example, must start again from scratch. The nexus of climate, peace and security was largely overlooked in the negotiations, as well as in the action agenda presented by the Turkish COP31 Presidency.

Building Peace in a Changing Climate: An Indigenous Perspective from Bangladesh

At the June Climate Meetings of the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) in Bonn, Mrinal Kanti Tripura, Director of the Maleya Foundation in Bangladesh, shared his perspective on how climate change is affecting Indigenous Peoples in the Eastern Himalayan region. In this interview, he explains why climate impacts threaten not only livelihoods but also culture and traditional knowledge, and why Indigenous voices must be heard in climate negotiations.

Related articles