Blog Posts - Fabrizio Coticchia

Populist parties and foreign policy: The case of Italy’s Five Star Movement

5/26/2020

Here you'll find the link to my latest publication, which deals with the issue of populism and foreign policy. The title of the paper (co-authored with Valerio Vignoli) is: Populist parties and foreign policy: The case of Italy’s Five Star Movement. Here the abstract:
The role of political parties in foreign policy is gaining increasing attention. Nonetheless, despite an extraordinary interest in ‘populism’, the foreign policy of populist parties has rarely been investigated. This article provides an innovative theoretical framework, applying it on a rare example of a ‘pure’ populist party: Italy’s Five Star Movement. How has Five Star Movement positioned on Italian contribution to military operations abroad? What does such positioning say about its ideological leaning? In order to address such questions, the article analyses Five Star Movement’s MPs’ votes and speeches on foreign policy during its first term in Parliament (2013–2018). We find that, notwithstanding some ambiguities, the Movement’s stance has been mostly pacifist and humanitarian, resembling more a ‘left-libertarian populist party’ than a ‘sovereigntist far-right one’. Through these findings, the article contributes to the debate on populist parties and foreign policy in Europe, clarifying also the elusive ideological leaning of the Five Star Movement.

Migration, terrorism, and the Italian military engagement in Niger and Libya

4/16/2020

My latest publication in online: ‘I’ll take two.’ Migration, terrorism, and the Italian military engagement in Niger and Libya” (co-authored with M.Ceccorulli), Journal of Modern Italian Studies, 25(2). The paper (here the link, gated) contributes to the ongoing debate on the evolution of the Italian foreign, security and defence policy in the broader Mediterranean, offering insights for comparative analyses with other states engaged in those contexts. In January 2018, the Italian parliament approved a new military operation in Niger and an extension to the existing deployment in Libya. Italian leaders explicitly cast this as a ‘pivot’ to Africa. What factors underlie this strategic shift? Despite the importance of this question, to date, little analysis of the decision-making process underpinning the recent change has been forthcoming. The article seeks to address this gap through an analysis of the parliamentary debates on the missions. Specifically, it examines the ‘relative importance’ of the two threats/challenges motivating the interventions: irregular immigration and transnational terrorism. Spoiler: the first one is much more important.

Difesa e missioni: necessario un dibattito pubblico nel paese

2/3/2020

Nell’attesa della prossima discussione parlamentare relativa all'approvazione delle missioni militari italiane all’estero la rivista Affari Internazionali ha avviato un interessante dibattito sul tema, con una serie di articoli a riguardo. Qui il link al contributo che ho fornito alla discussione. Qui sotto l’abstract del pezzo:
Alla fine del 2019 il Ministro della Difesa, Lorenzo Guerini, aveva annunciato l’imminente approvazione della delibera annuale riguardante le operazioni militari internazionali, confermando la presenza di truppe italiane nei principali teatri operativi. A gennaio, di fronte alle Commissioni Difesa di Senato e Camera, il Ministro ha ribadito tale impegno, evidenziando al contempo come la recente evoluzione dello scenario internazionale – dalla Libia all’Iraq – abbia influenzato il processo di ‘costruzione’ del decreto missioni. In attesa che si svolga finalmente la discussione in Parlamento, alla luce del processo di trasformazione della politica di difesa italiana negli ultimi decenni, ed in seguito ai cambiamenti avvenuti nel contesto internazionale e in quello nazionale negli ultimi mesi, possiamo delineare alcuni pattern ricorrenti nella modalità con la quale i partiti italiani hanno affrontato il tema delle operazioni internazionali. Questa riflessione consente di collocare il prossimo dibattito sulle missioni militari all’interno di un quadro di analisi più ampio e strutturato, evidenziando fattori di continuità, possibili elementi novità e pressanti necessità che caratterizzano la politica di difesa italiana.

Peaceful legislatures? Parliaments and military interventions after the Cold War: Insights from Germany and Italy

1/21/2020

My latest paper on parliamentary war powers is online. The paper (co-authored with Francesco N. Moro) will be published at "International Relations" and it is titled: "Peaceful legislatures? Parliaments and military interventions after the Cold War: Insights from Germany and Italy". Here below the abstract.
The article contributes to the growing debate on parliamentary war powers and shows how parliaments matter in shaping both force deployment and force employment. Through original analysis of the Italian and German decision-making on military interventions after the Cold War, the article illustrates how formal and informal constraints shape the opportunity structures faced by executives that are willing to undertake military interventions. Revisiting, and building on, the great deal of research recently emerged on institutional constraints to the use of force, the article details the types of costs – namely, transaction and audience costs – linked to involvement of legislatives in the decision-making and provides empirical support for theories based on parliamentary war powers, adding new dimensions of analysis.

“Aspiring and Reluctant Middle-Powers? Italy’s and Germany’s Defense Reforms after the Cold War”

1/3/2020

My forthcoming book chapter will be: “Aspiring and Reluctant Middle-Powers? Italy’s and Germany’s Defense Reforms after the Cold War”, F.Coticchia and F.N.Moro, in G.Giacomello and B.Veerbek (eds) Middle Powers in Europe and Asia, Lexington, (2020). Here below you can find a description of the edited volume: This volume presents three claims regarding the role of middle powers in the 21st Century: first, states aspiring to become or remain middle powers choose from three possible role: to be a global middle powers; to be a regional pivot; or to be a niche leader. Second, states seeking such roles need different mixes of hard and soft power sources. Third, more so than great or small powers, middle powers walk a thin line between the domestic and systemic pressures they face. In this volume, these claims are based on (comparative) case studies of Germany, Iran, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, and Turkey.
Here the link to the table of contents.