Parliaments in security policy: Involvement, politicisation, and influence
| Published date | 01 February 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1369148117745684 |
| Author | Dirk Peters,Patrick A Mello |
| Date | 01 February 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Special Issue Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745684
The British Journal of Politics and
International Relations
2018, Vol. 20(1) 3 –18
© The Author(s) 2018
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1369148117745684
journals.sagepub.com/home/bpi
Parliaments in security policy:
Involvement, politicisation,
and influence
Patrick A Mello1 and Dirk Peters2
Abstract
While parliaments have long been neglected actors in the analysis of security policy, a research
literature on the subject is growing. Current research is focused primarily on how parliaments,
relying on formal legal competences, can constrain governmental policies. However, this research
needs expansion in three areas. First, informal sources of parliamentary influence on security policy
deserve more systematic attention as the significance of parliaments often hinges on contextual
factors and individual decision-makers. Second, we still lack a systematic understanding of the
effects of parliamentary involvement on security policy. Finally, the role of parliaments for the
politics of security is almost completely uncharted territory. When parliaments become involved in
security policy, does it foster transparency and contribute to the politicisation of security policy
so that security policy becomes a ‘normal’ political issue? The article reviews current research,
derives findings from the contributions to this Special Issue, and spells out their wider implications.
Keywords
democratic peace, legislative studies, parliaments, security policy, war powers
Introduction: Parliaments in security policy—Why bother?
Parliament is the pivotal democratic institution. Yet, despite a large body of research on
the democratic peace thesis and the significance of democracy for security policy—and
an equally sized literature on legislatures—the relationship between parliaments and
security policy is not well understood.1 Research on the democratic peace thesis has
established that a linkage exists between shared democracy inside states and peaceful
relations between them. While democracies are as war-prone as non-democracies, there
are almost no wars between consolidated democracies. According to an influential
explanation for the democratic peace, democratic institutions play a causal role in the
1Willy Brandt School of Public Policy, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany & Bavarian School of Public
Policy, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
2Peace Research Institute Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Corresponding author:
Patrick A Mello, Willy Brandt School of Public Policy, University of Erfurt, Nordhäuserstr. 63 / B39,
Erfurt 99089, Germany.
Email: patrick.mello@uni-erfurt.de
745684BPI0010.1177/1369148117745684The British Journal of Politics and International RelationsMello and Peters
research-article2018
Special Issue Article
4 The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 20(1)
process of interdemocratic peace because they help to transmit the preferences of a war-
averse population into government policies (Doyle, 1986).
Against this backdrop, it is surprising that the role of parliaments for the formulation
and implementation of security policy has received scant attention in previous studies.
Regardless of the type of democracy, parliaments constitute a highly significant repre-
sentative institution and take a central place in the polity, in which public debate and
decision-making about political rules are integrated. If the key mechanism for the demo-
cratic peace is that governments need to consider the preferences of the population, par-
liaments will play an important role in that mechanism, representing and articulating
preferences of the electorate.
Similarly, comparative research on parliaments has paid little attention to the role that
parliaments have in security and remained largely focused on their legislative functions,
matters of domestic policy, or their role in democratisation processes. In a recent hand-
book on legislative studies (Martin et al., 2014), only a single chapter addresses foreign
policy broadly conceived (Raunio, 2014). Others examine whether parliament wields a
formal constitutional right to declare war and take it as an indicator of parliamentary
influence on security policy (Fish and Kroenig, 2009). However, in an age where declara-
tions of war are obsolescent, this measure has become virtually meaningless.
The lack of interest in parliaments’ role in security reflects a traditional view that
regards parliaments as inconsequential actors in this policy field and their involvement in
decision-making as inappropriate or unnecessary for several reasons. Public debate of
security matters is considered inadequate due to requirements of secrecy. Parliamentary
procedures are seen as too cumbersome for security policy where swift decisions are war-
ranted. Foreign and security policy is assumed to be of less concern to citizens than
domestic politics (Raunio, 2014: 543).
As we will show, this view has become less convincing since the end of the Cold War.
Meanwhile, a growing literature has started to address the role of parliaments in the secu-
rity realm (Dieterich et al., 2015; Kesgin and Kaarbo, 2010; Ku and Jacobson, 2003;
Mello, 2012; Peters and Wagner, 2014; Raunio and Wagner, 2017).2 This Special Issue is
both an indicator of and a contribution to this change in the literature. We argue that this
research, despite the need for further refinement, holds promise to transcend the narrow
concerns of specific fields and equally contribute to international relations (IR) theory,
foreign policy analysis, legislative studies, and democratic theory by exploring the
neglected interplay between domestic and international politics. For IR and the study of
international peace and conflict, it contributes to a clearer understanding of the contribu-
tion that domestic institutions make to the use of force by democracies. The same holds
for foreign policy analysis, which has been predominantly occupied with the role of the
executive in foreign policy decision-making. For comparative politics and legislative
studies, it presents an opportunity to test the generalisability of their insights about the
workings of parliamentary institutions beyond the legislative realm. Democratic theory
has intensively studied general questions of political representation and accountability
but seldom focused on the role that legislatures can play for the democratic legitimation
of security policy.
However, to realise its potential, this emerging field needs further development. We
suggest three areas that deserve particular attention. First, there is a lack of studies that
explore the informal sources of opportunities for parliamentary influence on security
policy. As we will show below, research has focused on how the relations between parlia-
ments and executives are formally structured. The recent past has brought significant
To continue reading
Request your trial