Eurocentrism in the analysis of European foreign policy often renders scholars blind to other world views and realities, although engaging with these may be critical for understanding the relevance and impact of this policy in other parts of the world. Notwithstanding calls for decentring the study of International Relations and European foreign policy in particular, scholars of European foreign policy generally lack the tools and conceptual lenses to overcome Eurocentrism in their analyses. This article proposes an analytical framework to systematically open up for difference, and to see and understand dynamics and realities that go beyond dominant Eurocentric accounts, while trying to avoid the pitfalls of simplification and knowledge fragmentation. The framework consists of six partially overlapping decentring categories-spatial, temporal, normative, polity, linguistic, and disciplinary decentringand is developed through two dimensions of the Decentring Agenda proposed by Fisher Onar and Nicolaïdis: 'provincialising' (questioning Eurocentric perspectives) and 'engagement' (learning from other perspectives). In this way, this article aims to support scholars of European foreign policy in overcoming Eurocentrism and in operationalising the Decentring Agenda.

The EU's external promotion of norms and the idea of normative power Europe itself are increasingly contested, which is especially true in the EU's southern neighbourhood. However, whereas scholars of EU foreign policy acknowledge the contestation of external norms, they find it difficult to understand why other normative frameworks could be equally or more appealing to Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) countries, as they entail norms that are less prominent in the Western catalogue of liberal values. To facilitate the detection and analysis of a wider set of norms, we situate them along several continua of norm orientations and apply this framework to the EU's southern neighbourhood. EU foreign policy scholars can then examine whether different norms overlap or compete or are complementary or even incompatible, and the extent to which values promoted by European actors are congruent with normative frameworks in the MENA region.

The 2019 European Commission recognizes a need to learn the language of power and geopolitics for the EU to become a stronger player in a contested world. Yet the EU experiences difficulties in navigating the geopolitical scene in its immediate neighbourhood, the Middle East and North Africa, characterized by fast-changing alliances among international and regional powers but also a wide array of non-state and hybrid actors. Policy recommendations urge the EU to include the latter in its foreign policy calculus. This article investigates how the EU accounts for a specific set of actors by exploring its foreign policy discourse. Specifically, it analyses how two hybrid actors, Hamas and Hezbollah, are discussed within the European Parliament, Commission and Council. It is argued that internal contestation over the terrorist nature of these actors poses challenges for the EU to join the geopolitical game in its Southern neighbourhood.

No abstract

Abstract This analytical review essay discusses five recent books on Hamas and Hezbollah, which see the groups as peculiar yet increasingly important actors in the Middle East and in international relations more broadly. The books illustrate a growing attention to these actors, not merely as armed spoilers, but as legitimate incumbents in national elections and providers of local governance. They also highlight the challenges this approach creates for traditional International Relations (IR) frameworks, in which such actors are not easily situated. Together, the books provide a rich actor-centred perspective on these cases and display various complementary social scientific theories, methods and data with which they can be approached. This review aims to tease out the novel insights these works and cases have to offer for recent debates on norm contestation in IR. Rather than evaluating these actors' discourse and behaviour against western normative frameworks in IR and international politics, the books contribute by exposing a wealth of different norms, and different approaches to interpreting and applying norms, beyond those frameworks.