Right(s) practice: normative competence negotiation in the struggles over human rights protection in AMISOM
Chiara de Franco & Linnéa Gelot
What the paper says
Abstract This article examines the interplay of power and norm contestation in the AU–EU strategic partnership, focusing on struggles over human rights protection in the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM). While AMISOM marked a milestone for African-led conflict management, reports of civilian casualty triggered EU concerns over compliance with human rights and international humanitarian law. In response, AU officials promoted an African-led approach to civilian protection, seeking recognition for their human rights competence. To make sense of these dynamics, we employ a Bourdieusian framework and introduce the notion of “normative competence negotiation,” defined as the dynamic recognition of agents’ ability to call and act out appropriate conduct in a field of practice. Drawing on fieldwork (2016–2024) in Baidoa, Mogadishu, Addis Ababa, Brussels, Nairobi, and remotely, we analyse how AU and EU actors negotiated normative competence through the implementation of the Civilian Casualty Tracking, Analysis, and Response Cell (CCTARC). We show how AU’s competence claims challenged the EU and partially reshaped field dynamics, though structural asymmetries persisted. The article contributes to contestation theories by foregrounding power as emerging from contestation, advances Bourdieusian IR by theorizing norms as symbolic capital, and develops a practice-theoretical account of normative competence as relational and field-dependent.
2 citations
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10 |
| M · momentum | 0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.