This article critically examines the effectiveness of the European Union’s human rights-driven sanctions against Russia and Belarus, focusing on their role as instruments of normative foreign policy. Employing a comparative case study approach and the Normative Power Europe (NPE) framework, the study finds that while EU sanctions robustly signal a commitment to human rights and have imposed significant economic and reputational costs, they have not resulted in meaningful political change or democratization. Instead, both regimes adapted through economic diversification and increased repression, while ordinary citizens faced inflation and restricted access to goods. The analysis uniquely highlights the divergent adaptation strategies in Russia and Belarus, the challenges of maintaining EU policy coherence, and the importance of multilateral coordination. The paper concludes with actionable recommendations for a more targeted, coherent, and humanitarian EU sanctions strategy.

ABSTRACT The European Union (EU) has reshaped global digital governance through a form of norm entrepreneurship that operates through regulatory sequencing rather than persuasion. By constructing an interlocking regulatory ecosystem across data protection (GDPR), artificial intelligence governance (AI Act) and platform governance (DMA/DSA), the EU has driven norm emergence, anticipatory cascade and structural internalisation beyond its borders. The concept of Regulatory Ecosystem Norm Entrepreneurship (RENE) demonstrates how norms diffuse through market infrastructures, technical standards and architectural constraints, generating path dependence without full ideational convergence. These findings reveal a transformation of normative power in the digital age, where regulatory capacity increasingly substitutes for material dominance in shaping global order.

ABSTRACT When a speaker of Singapore English types ‘Can or not?’ into an AI writing assistant and receives ‘Is it possible?’ in return, something more than correction has occurred: a normative judgment has been rendered, algorithmically and at scale. This article examines how artificial intelligence (AI) systems reshape normative power in Asian Englishes through mechanisms of differential audibility. Focusing on Outer and Expanding Circle Englishes, it argues that AI operates as a normative infrastructure mediating ideologies of correctness, fluency, and legitimacy beyond traditional institutional gatekeeping. Systematic analysis reveals that AI privileges globally dominant varieties while filtering features of Asian Englishes into statistical marginality. This produces asymmetrical pluralism: multiple Englishes are present in AI-mediated interaction but are unevenly authorized in terms of visibility, normative weight, and legitimacy. Despite Asia’s substantial AI engagement, participation does not translate into proportional normative influence. The article calls for greater attention to audibility, norm circulation, and inequality in AI-mediated contexts.

This article offers a Hohfeldian analysis of the right to die and asks what follows, normatively and institutionally, once the relevant incidents are distinguished. It argues that debates about assisted dying frequently conflate four questions: whether choosing death is morally permitted (licence), whether others must not interfere with that choice (negative claim-right), whether a valid request can alter others' normative situation (normative power), and whether anyone owes assistance (positive claim-right). The paper maps major objections to the incident they primarily target and shows that many familiar objections to assisted dying bear most directly on duties of assistance rather than on the underlying permission or the claim against interference. Substantively, it defends a universal moral licence to die and, where competence, voluntariness, and adequate information are satisfied, a corresponding negative claim-right against unjustified interference. Its institutional conclusion is more limited than a direct duty on any particular physician to provide assisted death: what can be justified more securely is a right to make a request that must be assessed under public criteria and, in jurisdictions authorising assisted dying, routed to willing and licensed providers. Separating public validity review from plural provision models, the paper argues, can reduce coercion and conscience-based conflict while preserving access.

The global technological rivalry between the United States and China has confronted the European Union with a structural dilemma: lacking its own technology giants, microelectronics manufacturing capacity, and cloud infrastructure comparable to that of the United States or China, Europe’s digital sphere has produced what may be termed a “digital vacuum.” This article examines EU digital sovereignty as a strategic project aimed at overcoming this outsider status amid deep technological dependence on external suppliers.A gap in the scholarly discourse has been identified: existing research treats the EU’s internal regulatory architecture and its external cyber diplomacy as separate phenomena, without explaining the systemic mechanism connecting them. To address this gap, the article distinguishes three spheres of EU digital sovereignty — data sovereignty, technological autonomy, and the normative weight of the single market — each of which forms a distinct layer of the regulatory architecture. These layers serve as the conceptual foundation for the central theoretical contribution of the work.The scientific novelty lies in the substantiation of a two-phase transmission model that explains the mechanism by which the EU’s normative power is converted into geopolitical influence. The first phase describes unilateral regulatory export through the “Brussels Effect”: the EU’s market weight compels transnational corporations and third countries to implement European standards globally. The second phase — multilateral cyber diplomacy — is activated where market logic exhausts its possibilities, namely in relations with sovereign states that advance alternative paradigms. In this phase, regulatory precedents from the first phase are converted into diplomatic arguments: the Schrems II ruling prompted the United States to adopt Executive Order 14086, while the European AI Act set the agenda of the G7 Hiroshima Process before any alternative model had emerged.It is demonstrated that, faced with a deficit of infrastructural capacity — or so-called “poietic power” — the EU compensates by expanding its “cybernetic power”: the ability to establish the rules of the digital space. This strategy unfolds amid growing competition with Beijing and Washington, both of which are actively building physical infrastructure for the development of emerging technologies. The methodological basis of the study comprises a systemic approach, normative-legal analysis, and the case study method (the Brazilian LGPD, the corporate policies of Facebook and Microsoft, and the Schrems II ruling). The conclusion is drawn that EU digital sovereignty represents a model of “regulatory diplomacy by default” — one that allows the Union to preserve its geopolitical weight not through symmetrical infrastructural competition, but through the establishment of normative rules that extend far beyond its borders.

While citizen science (CS) has gained global reputation as a valuable participatory research methodology, over the last decade its demarcation is still somewhat controversial. Attempts to reach a precise definition of CS have resulted in several sets of criteria, principles and minimum requirements without universal normative power. In search of a transparent and just selection process, platforms offering access to CS projects started to define their own selection criteria. In 2017, the Austrian CS community co-created a set of 20 quality criteria to define minimum requirements for CS projects to be listed on the national platform Österreich forscht. After more than five years of applying the criteria, we reflect on the implications for CS projects in Austria. Our mixed method approach of qualitative and quantitative analysis across 103 projects shows no disadvantage for specific research domains or types of institution, but certain challenges for project coordinators to apply all criteria to their projects. The analysis suggests an overall improvement of projects, especially in regard to their ‘citizen scientificity’, meaning that the criteria helped them to better distinguish themselves from other scientific methods, improving their engagement, communication and open data management.

ABSTRACT This paper proposes a novel reinterpretation of the familiar, if inchoate, thought that paternalism offends against an ideal of personal sovereignty. The central idea is that (competent) persons have a particular kind of normative power. Just as each of us has the right to control how others are permitted to use our bodies or property, we each have a structurally similar right to control how others are permitted to use our good . When others seek to benefit us without adequately consulting our will, they trespass into a domain that is ours to control, treating us as lacking rights that we in fact have. The paper argues that this theory of anti‐paternalism is superior to existing accounts, is independently attractive, and rests on deeper foundations.

The deepening of strategic rivalry between the United States and China has encountered new arenas of confrontation on the basis of military and economic expansion into the politics of narrative construction and ideological impacts. The paper explores a new form of warfare known as narrative warfare between the Liberal International Order championed by U.S. and a Chinese notion of a Community of Shared Future to Mankind. Based on constructivist theory and the concept of soft power fronted by Joseph Nye, the paper will examine how the two powers utilize discourse, diplomacy and multilateral institutions and development programs as their instruments of influence in creating global norms and legitimacy. This paper will contend that the modern global political battle is ultimately a war of normative power and modes of world governance by comparing the American-based idea of democracy, human rights, and rule-based governance against the rhetoric of sovereignty, non-interference, and developmental multi-lateralism of the Chinese. The research concludes that narrative warfare is transforming patterns of alignment in the Global South and rehabilitating the building of international order.

The core of international competition in the digital age has shifted to the struggle for rule-making power. As the principal actors, the United States, China, and the European Union are reshaping the global digital order through digital public diplomacy. From a political economy perspective, this paper constructs a three-dimensional analytical framework—"Strategic Positioning-Rule Tools-Efficacy Analysis"—to examine the divergent strategies of these three actors in the realms of technical standards, data governance, and digital trade. The study finds that the United States leverages value-based alliances to promote exclusive rule hegemony, China achieves breakthroughs through development-oriented alternative rules, and the EU constructs standard barriers by capitalizing on its normative power. The contest for rule-making authority is, in essence, a process of reconstructing power structures in the digital age, the outcomes of which will profoundly shape the landscape of global digital governance. Developing countries must seek strategic autonomy amid great power rule competition, enhancing their rule-making influence through technological localization and multilateral cooperation.

This study examines the perceived polarization between the European Union’s (EU) normative, value- and conditionality-based development model and the People’s Republic of China’s (China) pragmatic, state-centered Beijing Consensus approach within the context of Sub-Saharan Africa. The central question of the research is whether the development strategies of the EU and China represent two genuinely opposing paradigms, or rather distinct responses to the shared structural constraints of the global political economy. Built upon a four-dimensional comparative analytical framework, policy design, implementation model, discursive perception, and strategic logic, the study covers the period from 2000 to 2024. Drawing on secondary sources, including development documents, implementation projects, and public opinion surveys, the analysis reveals that China’s state-led and demand-driven investment model has achieved rapid infrastructural outcomes in countries with weak governance capacities, while indirectly undermining the effectiveness of the EU’s political conditionality. However, public opinion data indicate that African societies continue to maintain a strong orientation toward democratic norms, transparency, and institutional accountability. This finding suggests a structural tension between the pragmatic preferences of political elites and the normative aspirations of African societies. Ultimately, the study argues that sustainable development in Sub-Saharan Africa can only be achieved by transcending this binary divide through the creation of hybrid and interdependent cooperation mechanisms that integrate the EU’s normative power with China’s flexible economic pragmatism.

Abstract Recently, the concept ‘queer joy’ has gained interest in LGBT+ scholarship in the West. I use this scholarship as an entry point to explore how school‐attending LGBT+ youth express joy and how joy serves as a form of resistance against gender and sexuality norms in educational settings. While I prioritise a focus on joy, I do not overlook the existing South African research on the adverse experiences of LGBT+ youth but explore how LGBT+ youth talk about joy as resistance and liberatory praxis against cisheteronormative power. I draw on in‐depth interviews from a larger project with 18 LGBT+ school‐attending youth from a range of South African schools, aiming to understand their cultural worlds and how broader cultural meanings and practices influence their experience of gender, sexuality and everyday schooling. I conducted all the interviews, which were subsequently subject to both thematic and within‐case and cross‐case analysis. The findings reveal a nuanced understanding and interpretation of joy, which I have organised into two parts. Participants portray joy as socially produced and circulatory, rather than as having any interior quality. They explain how school structures, discourses and practices reinforce social norms and differences, which determine the circuitous nature of joy. Second, the findings emphasise queer joy as a catalyst for social awareness through cultural and reflective practices and a springboard for resistance and social change. On the face of it, the findings signal directions for leveraging joy to address normative power and school climate, as well as for repurposing it within curriculum and educational practice.

<p><em>This study explores the voices of Banjar migrant women who experienced polygamy, focusing on their lived experiences and the socio-cultural mechanisms that legitimize this practice. Employing a life history method, the research draws on in-depth interviews with Banjar women subjected to polygamous marriages in Serdang Bedagai, Indonesia. Data were analyzed through a systematic process involving data reduction, narrative presentation, and conclusion drawing. The findings reveal that polygamy within Banjar society is deeply embedded in religious interpretations, cultural traditions, and social norms, all of which are reinforced by the authority of Tuan Guru (religious leaders) who frame the role of polygamous wives as spiritually honorable. However, beneath this constructed legitimacy lies a system of male domination that operates through three interrelated forms of power: material power, manifested in male control over economic resources; symbolic power, which enhances male social status through polygamy; and normative power, which restricts women’s resistance through religious and cultural justification. Together, these forms of power constitute a cohesive structure of gendered subjugation, wherein polygamy functions not only as a personal or cultural practice but as an institutionalized mechanism of oppression.</em></p>

Education and mobility have become central pillars of the European Union’s strategy for promoting integration and influence beyond its borders. This paper investigates the impact of international student exchanges on Europeanization and soft diplomacy, taking Albania as a case study. By analyzing the Erasmus+ programme through a documentary and analytical approach, the study explores how academic mobility operates as a vehicle for transmitting European norms, values, and institutional models in candidate countries. Drawing on official EU reports, national statistics, and existing literature, the paper identifies Erasmus+ as a dual instrument educational and diplomatic that contributes to both individual transformation and institutional alignment with EU standards. The analysis highlights how participation in Erasmus+ strengthens students’ European identity, intercultural competence, and perception of the EU as a normative power, while also influencing domestic higher education governance through policy learning and adaptation. However, persistent challenges remain, including unequal access, limited institutional absorption, and weak mechanisms linking returnee alumni to national academic development. The findings emphasize the strategic role of educational diplomacy as a bottom-up process of Europeanization that extends the EU’s soft power in the Western Balkans. The paper concludes by underlining the relevance of Erasmus+ as a catalyst for shaping pro-European social attitudes and enhancing Albania’s integration trajectory. Received: 13 October 2025 / Accepted: 16 December 2025 / Published: January 2026

This essay examines how Germany developed and sustained a strategic energy partnership with Russia after reunification, and how this policy was legitimised through the European Union’s normative discourse. Through a focused analysis of post-Cold War Ostpolitik culminating in the Nord Stream era, it shows how successive German governments framed energy interdependence with Russia as a normative project of stability and modernisation, while downplaying geopolitical and security concerns. Building on Mackinder’s theoretical framework, the essay does not present Ostpolitik as an ideological project, but rather as an expression of Germany’s continental geopolitical position, which has manifested across different political eras. Regarding the relationship between Normative Power and Geopolitics, the essay does not treat these as mutually reinforcing concepts. On the contrary, the core argument highlights the tension and contradiction between Germany’s normative self-representation and the material imperatives shaping its Eastern policy. Lastly, the research demonstrates that Russia’s war against Ukraine has exposed the structural vulnerabilities of geo-economic dependence, undermining European security and strategic coherence.

Rethinking the European Union's Foreign Policy Identity: A Research Proposal on Normative Power Europe in Crisis

Geoeconomic Statecraft and Normative Power: Germany, the Eurozone, and Strategic Interdependence with Russia

ABSTRACT This study conducts a comprehensive and critical examination of the interplay between development assistance and strategic geopolitical objectives in the European Union's (EU) engagement with African crises. Although the EU positions itself as a normative power committed to advancing peace, development, and human rights, its practices often reflect a tension between liberal ideals and realist calculations. Drawing on a multi‐theoretical framework, including postcolonial critique, structural realism, and liberal institutionalism, the article explores how development aid functions both as a soft power instrument and a mechanism for crisis management. It analyzes the deployment of conditional aid, the securitization of development, and the instrumental use of humanitarian rhetoric to secure strategic influence, particularly in North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and the Sahel region. The study also interrogates the dissonance between the EU's professed commitment to equal partnership and the persistence of asymmetrical relationships rooted in postcolonial legacies. The findings of this research reveal significant inconsistencies between the EU's discourse and its foreign policy actions on the ground. These contradictions not only erode the EU's credibility as a reliable partner but also hinder the development of authentic, reciprocal EU–Africa relations. The study ultimately proposes a reimagining of these relations, centered on decolonized aid structures, the genuine empowerment of African stakeholders, and the clear separation of development cooperation from coercive strategic objectives rooted in European self‐interest.

This paper assesses the extent to which the EU’s development cooperation activities contribute to diffusion of its norm of sustainable development (environment) to Vietnam. In the post-Cold War era, EU normative influence has largely operated through technical assistance, financial instruments, policy dialogue, and capacity-building programs directed at developing countries. By analyzing key programming documents and aid instruments, the study demonstrates that environmental sustainability is not merely rhetorical but systematically mainstreamed into the EU’s cooperation frameworks in Vietnam. The paper further investigates how these normative expectations interact with Vietnam’s domestic priorities, assessing the degree to which EU-driven initiatives have informed policy agendas, institutional practices, and governance approaches within the recipient state. Through this dual assessment of EU intentions and Vietnam’s strategic responses, the article provides insights into the nature of EU normative power in Southeast Asia, the mechanisms enabling or constraining norm localization, and the EU’s evolving post-crisis image in its engagement with Vietnam—a former colony of an EU Member State. The findings suggest that norm diffusion has occurred, albeit selectively and pragmatically, shaped by Vietnam’s developmental concerns and policy autonomy. Acknowledgement and funding Some parts of the paper are based on the unpublished Phd thesis entitled “Analysing Normative Power Europe through Trade and Development Cooperation Policies towards Vietnam” undertaken at Sant’Anna University (Italy) and Ghent University (Belgium). We would also like to thank the Vietnamese Ministry of Education & Training for their support, under the research grant B.2023-SP2-07.

This article analyzes Western European reactions to Azerbaijan’s counterterrorism operation in Khankendi on 19–20 September 2023, situating them within the broader transformation of EU foreign policy from normative ideals toward strategic pragmatism. The study argues that Europe’s response was shaped primarily by energy interdependence, regional stability, and the strategic impact of the war in Ukraine, rather than moral or humanitarian considerations. France pursued an ideologically driven, pro-Armenian stance, resulting in diplomatic isolation, while Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom emphasized pragmatic engagement, prioritizing energy security, dialogue with Baku, and regional predictability. EU institutions revealed internal inconsistencies, with declarative rhetoric often lacking operational follow- through, underscoring the limits of the normative power paradigm in peripheral regions. The Khankendi case illustrates the consolidation of realism as the guiding principle in European policy toward the South Caucasus. For Azerbaijan, this shift reinforced its sovereignty, strategic role, and capacity to act as a stabilizing actor in the post- conflict region, highlighting the growing recognition of its importance in Europe’s energy and security architecture.

Research Problem: The regional peacekeeping efforts in Africa are often couched within the language of dependence, fragility, and control. This is actually a way of concealing an important puzzle: Whether or not regional interventions, especially those conducted by ECOWAS, reproduce global dependency, or are practices through which African institutions constitute autonomy, legitimacy, and sovereignty in the world. Methodology: The research framework is constructivist institutionalism, and the study follows a mixed-methods design. Discourse analysis of the ECOWAS communiqué, peacekeeping mandates, and summit statements is done, and data from Afrobarometer, SIPRI, and the ECOWAS financial statements is used and validated. The analysis is done for the states of Liberia, The Gambia, Mali, and the contribution of Nigeria, referred to as the anchor state. Results: The results show the ECOWAS peacekeeping role not only as a reaction to crisis management but also as a performative act of autonomy, which symbolically asserts sovereignty, authority, and legitimacy by the regional entities. From the unmandated operation in Liberia to the democratic enforcement mission in The Gambia, the ECOWAS operation displays institutional creativity in the assertion of normative autonomy even as it remains materially dependent on others. The effect of the emergence of multipolarity upon the continent of Africa is to increase the options of the continent even as it also generates more weaknesses. Conclusion: ECOWAS peacekeeping practices demonstrate the constant paradox of autonomy where sovereignty is expressed both in discourse and performance, despite the continuation of structural dependence. This means that regional peacekeeping is a transitional instance where Africa practices group sovereignty with limitations posed by global asymmetry and where intervention is transformed into legitimacy-building and not just coercion. Key Contribution to Knowledge: This research reconceptualizes African peacekeeping efforts from being derivative within the security sphere to being the process through which sovereignty is made, thereby contributing to the furtherance of constructivist institutionalism by showing the possibilities for the performance of autonomy even when dependence is at play. This research is relevant in the sense that it helps in the exploration of African agency. Recommendation: For performative autonomy to grow into structural autonomy, ECOWAS must therefore build upon its indigenous sources of financing, professionalize command structures, and strengthen its partnerships with a view to taking advantage of multipolarity to match its normative power with material capacity.