Efforts to create or maintain rules to contain the risks stemming from an unrestrained multilateral arms race are at the core of a normative world order. The importance arises from the dangers associated with phases of power changes from a more unipolar to a more multipolar order but is also due to the increased sensitivity of the international system towards developments in such regions, in which several great powers claim vital interests, as well as impacts arising from such singular events like 9/11 on the perception and strategy choices of decisive actors.

The project primarily poses the question of the fragility or potential for stability of a normative order in the field of the control of weapons of mass destruction as well as anti-personal mines, small arms and cluster bombs in the 21st century. This research is done by comparing the arms control policies of selected actors, who are decisive for the success or failure of arms control. The focus lies not only on the degree of overlap/common interests and difference/dichotomy of the arms control policy goals, but also on the underlying perceptions, world views, self-images and – closely connected – the vital interests as defined by the actors. Special attention is paid to the role of justice regarding the status quo and the proposed regulations as well as to the relationship between the applied principles of justice and interests.

Following the constructivist research agenda on norms we investigate the relationship between identity/role, construction of interests, proposed normative orders and the respective underlying standards of justice and political output. This configuration – as well as continuity or change we may find in it – may lead to conclusions on how firmly established or changeable and open to compromise the policy positions are.

The dynamic of such normative systems is analyzed according to three variables which have been identified as possible ‘driving forces’ for norm evolution: norm entrepreneurs, intrinsic conflicts in existing normative systems as well as exogenous factors (e.g. technological progress or salient international events).

By applying content- and process-analysis to single case studies, we test if, and if so what kind of influence conflicting notions of justice have on the evolution – including change, weakening and dissolution - of international norms. Special attention will be paid to the question, how and in what way conflicting notions of justice might influence the evolution of norms over time.

This research project is part of and supported by the Cluster of Excellence “The Formation of Normative Orders”, located at the University of Frankfurt.