ABSTRACT
What follows from an analysis of the normative controversies during the 2002/2003 Iraq crisis and the 2011/2012 Syria crisis for an understanding of the United Nations Security Council from a practice theory perspective? This chapter is devoted to discussing the findings of the two case studies and to drawing broader conclusions about the role and conduct of public Council meetings. The chapter discusses the prevalence of justifications stressing the Council’s procedures and ideational foundations as possible principles of worth in both cases and the relevance of public Council meetings for the Council. The chapter then uses an array of sources, including insights from fieldwork, to discuss the benefits of a broader practice theory perspective on public Council meetings. The role of rhetorical repertoires, procedures, and symbols are seen to be essential for the conduct of public Council meetings. Once we acknowledge their importance, we can understand how materialities, the shape of the Council chamber, and symbols, such as documents, as well as specific diplomatic cultures affect the way normative ordering unfolds. Ultimately, the chapter argues that public Council meetings should be understood as dynamic sites of the collective legitimation of Security Council decision-making. I conclude that the meetings themselves are as important and constitutive for the Council as the actual decision-making itself.
