摘要：《欧洲国际关系杂志》（EUropean Journal of International Relations）广泛地代表了已在欧洲发展的国际关系领域。自1995年创刊以来，该杂志已成为国际关系学界一个重要而独立的声音。它以其欧洲起源为基础，经过二十多年的发展，

期刊简介

《欧洲国际关系杂志》（EUropean Journal of International Relations）广泛地代表了已在欧洲发展的国际关系领域。自1995年创刊以来，该杂志已成为国际关系学界一个重要而独立的声音。它以其欧洲起源为基础，经过二十多年的发展，已成为国际关系界最佳成果的缩影，包括前沿的理论辩论、当代和过去的学术热点以及理论丰富的实证分析。

本期目录

1 多重性与“社会”问题

Multiplicity and the problem of ‘society’

2 人性“消极”观的辩护：对一种不切实际的假设的申辩

The “negative” view of human nature: apologia for an unrealistic assumption

3 后黑格尔的人权理论：超越承认与国家

A post-Hegelian theory of human rights: beyond recognition and the state

4 “黄祸论”与敌人本体论

The Yellow Peril and the Ontology of the Enemy

5 本体安全危机与角色认知变迁：俄乌战争对欧盟角色认知的影响

Ontological security crisis and role conception change: the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the European Union’s role conceptions

6 缅甸的救赎式革命：构成性权力与Nwe Oo（春天）革命中的主权斗争

Myanmar’s redemptive revolution: constituent power and the struggle for sovereignty in the Nwe Oo (Spring) Revolution

7 “不再是曾经的你”：事实上的国家与庇护国之间关系的再协商

‘No longer what you used to be’: Renegotiating relations between de facto states and their patrons

8 核武化与去民主化：安全、保密与法国核武器发展的追求（1945–1974）

Nuclearization and de-democratization: security, secrecy, and the French pursuit of nuclear weapons (1945–1974)

9 世界政治危机：乌克兰战争及其他背景下的跨国企业角色与应对

Crisis in world politics. Corporate roles and responses in the Ukraine war and beyond

内容摘要

多重性与“社会”问题

题目：Multiplicity and the problem of ‘society’

作者：Justin Rosenberg，萨塞克斯大学国际关系学荣誉教授。

摘要：本文旨在探讨国际理论中“社会多重性”（Societal Multiplicity）概念的一个主要缺陷，即其缺乏对“何谓社会”的明确界定。文章通过四个步骤填补这一空缺。首先，回顾关于“社会”定义的若干难题，并指出这些难题部分源于社会理论与国际理论的历史性分离。其次，文章结合这两大理论传统的资源，提出以下论点：(a) 社会多重性反映了人类群体在政治上的特定分隔方式；(b) 这种分隔在一定程度上源于政治作为社会生活特征之一所具有的向心属性；(c) 一个独立的“社会”最佳的定义方式，是将其视为这种多重性中的一个单位，即一个既是全球社会的地缘政治分支、又是社会整体的一部分的社会形态。第三，文章针对一系列可能的批评加以辩护，包括该定义过于宽泛、物化了国家、具有方法论上的民族主义倾向，以及抑制了历史多样性等质疑。最后，文章将这一定义纳入“社会多重性”概念框架之中，以检验其在国际关系及更广泛领域内的适用性，并探讨其对填补原始概念中定义空缺的影响及后果。

This article seeks to address a major shortcoming of the idea of Societal Multiplicity in international theory: its lack of a worked-out definition of what counts as ‘a society’. The article supplies this definition in four steps. First, it reviews some difficulties in defining ‘society’, arguing that these arise in part from the historical separation of social and international theory. Second, it interweaves resources from both traditions to argue: (a) that societal multiplicity reflects the specifically political separation of human populations; (b) that this separation arises in part due to centripetal properties of the political as a feature of social life; and (c) that an individual ‘society’ is best defined as a unit of the resultant multiplicity: a social formation that exists simultaneously as a geopolitical sub-division of the social world. Third, the article defends this definition against a series of objections – that it is too general, that it reifies the state, that it is methodologically nationalist and that it suppresses historical variety. And finally it inserts the definition into the idea of Societal Multiplicity in order to test how far, and with what consequences in International Relations and beyond, this closes the definitional gap left by the original formulation of that idea.

人性“消极”观的辩护：对一种不切实际的假设的申辩

题目：The “negative” view of human nature: apologia for an unrealistic assumption

作者：Francesco Raschi，博洛尼亚大学政治思想史副教授；Lorenzo Zambernardi，博洛尼亚大学政治学副教授。

摘要：人性“消极”观通常被视为经典现实主义方法的核心假设。这一颇具争议的观点或被认为是现实主义前科学阶段的形而上学概念，或被批判为一种危险的自我应验式预言。尽管这种对人性的黑暗描绘引发了激烈批评，本文认为仍有必要重新审视这一观点。本研究试图为人性“消极”观提供一种辩护，但并非基于对人类皆为危险个体的信念，而是出于纯粹的政治考量。许多旨在维护自由、独立、国内与国际多元主义，并防止权力过度集中从而形成支配性统治的重要机制，恰恰建立在人性存在问题性和潜在危险性的认知之上，并依赖制度和政治措施对个体行为加以约束。本文进一步指出，将人类视为危险存在的观念，并非政治现实主义的“专属财产”，而是洛克、孟德斯鸠和康德等著名自由主义思想家共同持有的观点。这或许是历史的一大讽刺：一种以捍卫自由与个人权利为旗帜的政治哲学，其理论基础竟建立在个体可能成为受贪婪与权力欲驱使的危险霸凌者的假设之上。

The “negative” view of human nature is customarily seen as a distinctive assumption of the classical realist approach. Such a controversial characterization is regarded either as a metaphysical conception belonging to the pre-scientific age of realism or as a dangerous self-fulfilling prophecy. Although the dark image of human nature has elicited fierce critiques, we contend that it needs to be reconsidered. The present article forms a kind of apologia for the “negative” view of human nature: not because of any belief that humans are all truly dangerous individuals, but for a purely political reason. Some of the most important mechanisms introduced in order to defend liberty, independence, domestic and international pluralism, and prevent power from concentrating in one point and thus becoming dominant, are themselves based on a view of the individual as problematic and potentially dangerous, whose behavior needs restraining by institutional and political measures. As we show in the article, it is no accident that the anthropological conception of human beings as dangerous is not the “private property” of political realism, but is shared by some illustrious fathers of liberalism such as Locke, Montesquieu, and Kant. It may be one of the ironies of history that the political philosophy whose manifesto proclaims the defense of freedom and individual rights should rest on a vision of the individual as potentially a dangerous bully, sometimes driven by greed and lust for power.

后黑格尔的人权理论：超越承认与国家

题目：A post-Hegelian theory of human rights: beyond recognition and the state

作者：David Jason Karp，萨塞克斯大学国际关系学高级讲师。

摘要：本文构建了一种后黑格尔的人权社会与政治理论。为此，文章超越了黑格尔哲学遗产中的两个关键方面：其承认理论以及其关于权利嵌入于国家之内的观点。国际关系研究（IR）常常误解黑格尔的承认理论，将其视为仅适用于国家行为所构成的公共世界。然而，黑格尔实际上认为，承认发生于社会世界之前，而非其中。因此，本文论证了为何黑格尔对索福克勒斯悲剧《安提戈涅》的分析，为当代国际实践的理论化提供了更为富有成效的起点。本文运用黑格尔式的“伦理生活”社会本体论，并结合后黑格尔主义对国家主义和欧洲中心主义的批判，提出人权应被理解为一个独立的行动领域，其中个体和集体的能动性得以体现，而非一种依附于主权与国家的实践。基于此分析，本文得出若干关于人权本体论与认识论的重要结论。人权实践不仅创造了行动和义务的形式，还促成了集体（而非仅仅个体）行动；它要求谦逊，而非傲慢；此外，它引发了关于行动者如何在外部与内部视角之间架起桥梁，以评估其实践所要求的行动之讨论。本文通过对黑格尔早期思想的批判性探索与重新诠释，纠正了国际关系研究领域长期以来依赖其晚期更具国家主义色彩的著作来界定伦理基础的倾向。

This article develops a post-Hegelian social and political theory of human rights. To do this, it moves past two legacies that can be traced back to Hegel’s philosophy: his theory of recognition and his views about the embeddedness of rights within states. IR often misinterprets Hegel’s recognition theory as applying within a public world of state action. However, Hegel argues that recognition occurs before rather than within a social world. Instead, I show how and why Hegel’s analysis of Sophocles’ play Antigone is a more fruitful starting point for theorising contemporary international practices. I mobilise a Hegelian social ontology of ‘ethical life’ and a post-Hegelian critique of statism and Eurocentrism to argue that human rights should be understood as an independent field of action in which agency is embedded, rather than as a practice that is tied to sovereignty and states. Several conclusions about the ontology and epistemology of human rights stem from this analysis. Human rights practice brings forms of action and obligation into being. It enables collective (not only individual) action. It requires the exercise of humility rather than hubris. Finally, it invites a discussion of how agents can bridge external and internal perspectives to evaluate the actions that seem to be required by their practices. This critical exploration and re-interpretation of Hegel’s early work corrects IR’s tendency to use his later and more statist writings to locate and concretise the grounds for ethics.

“黄祸论”与敌人本体论

题目：The Yellow Peril and the Ontology of the Enemy

作者：Jacob Kripp，波士顿大学政治学系的访问助理教授。

摘要：战争是如何以及何时被理解为一门“科学”的——一种可以通过定量计算和测量推导出普遍法则的学科？本文查阅了朝鲜战争期间美国作战研究办公室（Operations Research Office, ORO）的档案，提出种族战争如何塑造并生产了一种关于战争的科技—科学“真理”。这一科技—科学“真理”不仅推动战争演变为愈发残酷的帝国与种族暴力形式，同时也将这种暴力自然化、正当化为战争本质的一部分。科技—科学战争塑造了一个种族化的敌人：数量占优的亚洲共产主义者采用人海战术发动进攻，由于亚洲文化被认为缺乏对生命的敬畏，因此甘愿牺牲士兵。然而，这些看似非理性的战术依然可以通过定量分析加以预测。种族秩序塑造了科技—科学战争：战斗被建构为通过优化和管理白人种族在科技—科学方面的优越能力，以克服亚洲“暴民”的威胁并确保胜利的过程。ORO 将朝鲜视为未来战争的“实验室”，通过步兵武器、化学武器和核武器的技术手册，构建并生产了这些种族化战争观念。

How and when did war come to be understood as a “science”—one that could be quantitatively calculated and measured in such a way that one could derive universal laws? This paper turns to the archives of the Operations Research Office (ORO) during the Korean War to argue that race war orders and produces a scientific “truth” of war. This techno-scientific “truth” drives war to increasingly brutal forms of imperial and racial violence while simultaneously naturalizing and sanitizing this violence as the nature of war. Techno-scientific war produced a racialized enemy: the numerically superior Asian Communist attacked in human waves, willing to sacrifice soldiers because of an Asian disregard for life. But the enemy’s tactics, however seemingly irrational, could be rendered predictable through quantitative analysis. Race ordered techno-scientific war. Combat was rendered sensible through perfecting and managing the superior techno-scientific capabilities of the white race to overcome the problem of the Asian horde and ensure victory. By treating Korea as a “laboratory” for future combat, the ORO ordered and produced these racialized visions through technical manuals on infantry weapons, chemical weapons, and atomic weapons.

本体安全危机与角色认知变迁：俄乌战争对欧盟角色认知的影响

题目：Ontological security crisis and role conception change: the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the European Union’s role conceptions

作者：Gordon M. Friedrichs，德国海德堡马克斯·普朗克比较公法与国际法研究所的高级研究员；Jule Sommer，伦敦政治经济学院（LSE）欧洲与国际公共政策硕士研究生。

摘要：2022年俄乌战争对欧盟（EU）的角色认知施加了巨大压力，挑战了其作为规范性力量和文职权力的自我认知。本文采用本体安全理论的视角，探讨此次战争对欧盟角色认知的影响。我们区分了本体性不安全与本体性危机，并阐明欧盟在面对严重冲击、导致其自我形象与社会角色之间联系断裂时的应对方式。基于角色理论，本文分析此次战争如何促使欧盟重新审视其角色认知，并将角色变迁归纳为调整、适应、创新和放弃四种主要类型，探讨这些变化在欧盟角色体系内不同角色之间的具体差异。通过对欧盟官方文件的定性与定量内容分析，我们实证研究了欧盟在战争前后角色认知的变化。本文的分析有助于深化角色理论在国际组织（IO）研究中的应用，弥合外交政策分析与国际组织研究之间的理论鸿沟。此外，我们还推进了研究角色变迁的方法论，提供了关于地缘政治危机背景下外部事件、制度认同建构与本体安全之间复杂互动的深入见解。

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has put significant pressure on the European Union’s (EU) role conceptions, challenging its self-perception as a normative and civilian power. This article explores the impact of the invasion on EU role conceptions through the lens of ontological security theory. We differentiate between ontological insecurity and crisis, elucidating the EU’s responses to acute shocks that disrupt the connection between its self-image and social roles. Drawing on role theory, we examine how the invasion has prompted the EU to reconsider its roles. We identify adjustment, adaptation, innovation, and abandonment as key types of role change, exploring how these responses vary across individual roles within the EU’s role set. By combining qualitative and quantitative content analysis of EU documents, we empirically investigate changes in EU role conceptions pre- and post-invasion. Our analysis contributes to a deeper understanding of role theory’s application to international organizations (IOs), bridging gaps between foreign policy analysis and IO research. In addition, we advance methodological approaches to studying role changes, offering insights into the complex interplay between external events, institutional identity formation, and ontological security in the context of geopolitical crises.

缅甸的救赎式革命：构成性权力与Nwe Oo（春天）革命中的主权斗争

题目：Myanmar’s redemptive revolution: constituent power and the struggle for sovereignty in the Nwe Oo (Spring) Revolution

作者：Charlie Thame，清迈大学政治学系的国际关系助理教授。

摘要：革命是深刻的国际现象，塑造了世界历史发展、国际秩序与政治现代性。近年来的学术研究聚焦于革命宪制政治对世界事务的影响、解放伦理以及革命者的战略能动性，同时对阿拉伯之春后底层群体自我解放的前景表示担忧。本文研究了缅甸的Nwe Oo（春天）革命（2021年至今），这一革命发生在缅甸两次先后失败的“谈判型”和“消极型”革命之后，缅甸革命者从中汲取经验并加以超越。与消极革命的自上而下特征及谈判型革命的主要和平过渡模式不同，他们为自决权展开的非凡斗争促使我们重新审视既有的革命模式、主权概念及国际关系主流理论中的非暴力规范。本文认为，Nwe Oo革命承载着“救赎”与完成缅甸及全球范围内未竟革命的希望，甚至可能重新定义主权规范本身，即主权最终植根于一个共同体自主决定自身政治形式的构成性权力。因此，本文将其称为“救赎式革命”，以强调其独特性及世界历史意义。缅甸人民通过这场革命向世界传递了几个关键启示：群众集体行动的巨大潜力，统治阶级的权力并非不可逾越，自由的根基往往建立在暴力之上。这场革命是人类更广泛斗争的一部分——为社会自由和政治解放而战，而国际社会的首要回应应是团结，而非不干涉。

Revolutions are thoroughly international phenomena that have shaped world-historical development, international orders and political modernity. Recent scholarship foregrounds the consequences of their constitutional politics for world affairs, emancipatory ethos and revolutionaries’ strategic agency, and has raised concerns about the prospects of subaltern self-emancipation in the wake of the Arab Spring. This article presents a study of Myanmar’s Nwe Oo (Spring) Revolution (2021-present), which follows two successive failed revolutions of the negotiated and passive kind, the limitations of which Myanmar’s revolutionaries have learnt from and overcome. Offering a counterpoint to the top-down nature of passive revolutions and predominantly peaceful transitions of negotiated revolutions, their extraordinary struggle for self-determination forces us to reconsider established models of revolution, conceptions of sovereignty and norms of non-violence in mainstream IR. The article argues that Myanmar’s Nwe Oo Revolution bears the promise of redeeming and completing previous revolutions, both inside and outside Myanmar, and even the norm of sovereignty itself: as ultimately grounded in the constituent power of a community to determine the political forms of its own existence, calling it a redemptive revolution to emphasise its distinctiveness and world-historical significance. Through it, the peoples of Myanmar remind the world of several important lessons: about the potential of mass collective action, that the power of dominant classes is not insurmountable and that the grounds of freedom rest on violence. Theirs is a particular moment of a more universal human struggle: for social freedom and political liberation, the predominant response must be solidarity, not non-interference.

“不再是曾经的你”：事实上的国家与庇护国之间关系的再协商

题目：‘No longer what you used to be’: Renegotiating relations between de facto states and their patrons

作者：Nina Caspersen，约克大学政治学教授。

摘要：事实上的国家或分离地区对外部庇护国的依赖性已广为人知，但关于这些等级关系的具体动态，尤其是对附庸方的能动性缺乏深入研究。本文通过对两个处于危机状态的庇护—附庸关系的比较研究，探讨在与庇护国发生冲突时，较弱的附庸方如何应对。基于原始数据，包括档案资料和访谈数据，本文从自下而上的角度分析了《代顿和平协议》签署后塞尔维亚与斯普斯卡共和国之间的关系，以及2020年战争后亚美尼亚与纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫之间的关系。这种“失衡”状态为分析庇护—附庸关系的潜在机制提供了契机。在这两个案例中，危机导致了附庸方对庇护国的深度不信任，但事实上的国家仍无法完全断绝与庇护国的联系。这种困境源于缺乏可靠的替代支持者、对庇护国的持续依赖以及强有力的族裔民族主义叙事。非承认状态进一步削弱了附庸方的地位，但本文仍识别出明显的附庸能动性：附庸方积极寻求外部支持，并通过阻挠策略或诉诸庇护国国内势力向其施压。最终，这些关系被重新调整，等级性有所减弱。本文深化了对庇护—附庸关系的理解，特别是涉及非主权实体的情境，即便庇护国仍然保持事实上的垄断性影响。此外，本文通过构建庇护—附庸关系危机的分类框架，以及附庸方争取自主性的策略类型，结合实证案例分析附庸能动性及其受限因素，并展示了即便是国际体系中最弱势的行动者仍可能具备一定的影响力。

The dependence of de facto states/breakaway-territories on external patrons is well-established, but we lack detailed knowledge of the dynamics of these hierarchical relationships, including opportunities for client agency. Through a comparative study of two patron–client relationships that had reached a crisis point, this article examines how the weaker client responds when at odds with its patron. Drawing on original data, including archival sources and interviews, it provides a bottom-up analysis of the relationship between Serbia and Republika Srpska after the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement and between Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh immediately after the 2020 war. The out-of-equilibrium behaviour presents an opportunity for analysing the underlying mechanisms of patron–client relationships. In both cases, the crisis resulted in deep mistrust of the patron, but the de facto states were unable to sever links. They were constrained by a lack of reliable alternative supporters, continued patron dependence and powerful ethno-nationalist narratives. Non-recognition added to the client’s weakness, yet we still find clear examples of agency: external supporters were courted, and patrons were pressured through obstruction or appeals to its domestic forces. What resulted was a renegotiated, less hierarchical relationship. The article adds to our understanding of patron–client relationships, including those involving non-sovereign entities where an effective patronage monopoly still exists. It contributes to the existing literature with typologies of patron–client crises and client strategies for reclaiming autonomy, and with detailed empirical evidence of client agency and constraining factors, and by demonstrating the potential leverage of some of the weakest international actors.

核武化与去民主化：安全、保密与法国核武器发展的追求（1945–1974）

题目：Nuclearization and de-democratization: security, secrecy, and the French pursuit of nuclear weapons (1945–1974)

作者：Thomas Fraise，哥本哈根大学政治学系的博士后研究员。

摘要：国家在获得核武器后会发生怎样的变化？本文探讨了核武器获取对民主国家的影响。文章认为，核武器的获取应被理解为一种政治变革的过程，在这一过程中，国家行为体调整现有制度，以应对核武器带来的前所未有的挑战。“核武化”过程的一个重要表现是核保密机制的建立，这源于决策者试图掌控他们认为可能影响国家安全的敏感信息。然而，决策者可能并不确切知道哪些信息必须被隐瞒。然而，由于核政策的最终风险极高，他们倾向于采取最谨慎的做法，不愿冒险。核保密机制对民主治理产生深远影响：它可能排除部分决策主体，使公众无法获得完整信息，并可能被决策者滥用，以摆脱民主监督的约束。因此，核保密机制会削弱国家内部的公共咨询水平，导致民主的倒退。借用查尔斯·蒂利的概念，在核武化过程中，国家也经历了一种“去民主化”的转变。为论证这一观点，本文考察了1945年至1974年间法国的核保密机制。基于原始档案资料的分析，文章追溯了法国核保密制度的起源，揭示其与安全考量之间的关系，并说明这一发展如何最终降低了法国公共咨询的水平，推动了某种形式的去民主化进程。

Do states change when they acquire nuclear weapons? This article looks at the consequences of nuclear acquisition on democratic states. It argues that nuclear acquisition is best understood as a process of political change through which state actors adapt existing institutions to the new, and unprecedented, challenges created by nuclear weapons. One form of this process of “nuclearization” is the development of nuclear secrecy regimes, which results from actors’ desire to maintain control over information they perceive as potentially having major security implications. Actors may not know what, exactly, must be concealed. The ultimate stakes of nuclear policy, however, are so high that they have incentives not to take their chances. Secrecy has implications for democratic governance: it can exclude actors from decision-making, distort information made available to the public, and be abused by actors in search of autonomy from democratic control. As a result, nuclear secrecy affects the overall level of public consultation inside a state, causing a democratic recoil. To borrow Charles Tilly’s concept, during this process of nuclearization, states also de-democratize. To make this case, the article examines the French nuclear secrecy regime from 1945 to 1974. Drawing on primary sources, it traces the origins of nuclear secrecy in France back to security concerns and shows how this development ultimately reduced the level of public consultation in France and caused a form of de-democratization.

世界政治危机：乌克兰战争及其他背景下的跨国企业角色与应对

题目：Crisis in world politics. Corporate roles and responses in the Ukraine war and beyond

作者：Matthias Hofferberth，得克萨斯大学圣安东尼奥分校政治学与地理学系的副教授。

摘要：长期以来，全球治理研究认为，跨国企业（MNEs）在多方利益相关者共同提供公共产品的过程中发挥了重要作用，以至于它们应被视为全球治理者。然而，它们的介入是否真正改善了治理，仍是一个备受争议的问题。在这一背景下，跨国企业通常被视为特殊实体，既追求私人利益，又需兼顾更广泛的公共期望。本文提出，若对“危机”概念进行充分理论化，它将为这一讨论提供新的视角。为此，本文借鉴美国实用主义的思想，将危机定义为既是行为体所面临的挑战，同时也是研究者观察和分析信念表达的一种视角。在这一双重定义的基础上，本文构建了危机的类型学，并分析不同类型的危机如何影响跨国企业的角色及其应对方式。为了说明危机作为分析视角的概念潜力，本文考察了壳牌和埃克森美孚在俄乌战争后的反应。作为一种外生且突发的危机，本文探讨了这两家企业的应对是否体现出对新企业责任的更广泛接受或拒绝。通过对其决策过程的深入重构，本文得出结论：两家公司均未能有效解决这一危机。具体而言，壳牌仍然不愿主动应对，而埃克森美孚则完全拒绝介入，这种态度上的模糊性依然存在。本文在更广泛的世界政治背景下讨论了跨国企业所扮演的角色，并在文章结尾强调了重新概念化这些行为体的潜力与必要性。

For some time, Global Governance has made the case that multinational enterprises (MNEs) have become so involved in multistakeholder provisions of public goods that they should be considered as global governors. Their involvement and whether it improves governance, however, remain fiercely debated. In this context, MNEs are frequently framed and discussed as entities sui generis, pursuing private interests while reconciling with broader public expectations. The article argues that the concept of crisis, if adequately theorized, offers a new perspective into this discussion. To do so, I draw from American Pragmatism to introduce crisis both as a challenge for an actor but also a lens into the beliefs expressed throughout for the researcher. Against this dual use of the concept, I develop a typology of crises and relate this to the roles and responses of MNEs that are likely to follow from different crises. As a lens into corporate beliefs, I illustrate the conceptual potential of crisis by looking into how Shell and ExxonMobil respond to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. As an exogenous, rather immediate crisis, the article discusses to what extent their responses reveal a broader acceptance or rejection of new corporate responsibilities. Based on careful reconstruction, the article concludes that neither productively solved the crisis. More specifically, as Shell remains reluctant to engage with it and ExxonMobil outright rejects to do so, ambiguities remain. This is discussed in the broader context of what role MNEs play in world politics as the article ends with the potential of and need for reconceptualizing these actors.

译者：束任翔，国政学人编译员，中国社会科学院大学国际政治专业，研究兴趣为欧洲地区。

审校 | 张潇文

排版 | 张靖微

本文源于《欧洲国际关系杂志》（EJIR） Vol. 31, No. 1, 2025，本文为公益分享，服务于科研教学，不代表本平台观点。如有疏漏，欢迎指正。

来源：国政学人