Finding a cue through "Q"

Applying Q-Methodology to Compare German and U.S. Diplomats' Attitudes towards U.N. Security Council Reform

Auteurs

• Andreas Schwenk

Paramètres

• Sciences politiques & Politique

En savoir plus sur le livre

United Nations Security Council reform has been a contentious issue since the Cold War, particularly regarding its representation of current global power dynamics. Since 2007, efforts to modernize the council, such as granting Germany a seat, have stalled. This work chronicles the history and key players in this debate, emphasizing U.S. and German roles while employing political discourse analysis and Q-methodology. Diplomats from both nations ranked their agreement with various stakeholder statements from government, business, academia, and media. Instead of relying on predetermined categories, this approach reveals the debate's parameters through new diplomatic insights. The findings led to two main narratives: Convinced Institutionalism and Cautious Institutionalism. Andreas Schwenk’s innovative methodology sheds light on the perspectives of German and U.S. diplomats, contributing to the ongoing discourse on reform. As noted by Doris Hertrampf, former German Ambassador, the study highlights the urgent need for reform in the face of increasing challenges to multilateralism. William B. Wood, former U.S. Ambassador, praised the rigorous analysis, noting the commitment to maintaining an effective Security Council amid diverse opinions on potential changes to its structure and powers.

Achat du livre

• Année de publication: 2019
• Reliure: (souple)