A «Badge of Honour» or a «Stamp of Infamy»? NATO As A Marker of Status in International Politics
The symbolic significance of membership in NATO is widely recognized by Russian and foreign experts. However, attempts to systematically assess its role as a marker of the political status has not been made. This article intends to fill this gap, considering not only positive, but also negative cons...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN RU |
| Publicado: |
MGIMO University Press
2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/73adf0ebadea455396143340eb839eeb |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | The symbolic significance of membership in NATO is widely recognized by Russian and foreign experts. However, attempts to systematically assess its role as a marker of the political status has not been made. This article intends to fill this gap, considering not only positive, but also negative consequences of symbolic capital associated with the NATO membership. In order to determine the possible contradictions, benefits and costs for states from participating in the alliance, the authors examined the record of its three participants – France, Germany and Turkey. The comparison of these three cases enables to trace various status consequences of participation in a bloc for players whose material capacities and overall symbolic capital in the international system undergo different transitions. The theoretical literature and empirical record of the selected NATO members confirm that states compete in the international system for highly differentiated symbolic capital embodying various kinds of recognition. Status markers are complex social constructs, combining various political meanings. Meanwhile, states are not always able to control which types of social recognition will be activated by their inclusion in particular institutions. Despite the fact, that they may be interested only in some of the meanings associated with a status marker, they are compelled to take into account its other political connotations. As a result, NATO membership could bear for states a range of various social consequences. This could lead to a situation when several of them are equally relevant for the same actor, but some contain positive value, while others are assessed negatively. In addition, actors could face a contradiction between the status and practical consequences of participation in the alliance. |
|---|