Tuesday, 14 October 2025, 14:00 – 17:30, Room 001, Palazzo Prodi

Evaluation Committee

• Antonino Ali
• Sofia Graziani
• Emanuele Massetti
• Arlo Poletti
• Jens Woelk

Programme

14:00–14:30 – Silvia Bortolato

Arms Exports: Interpretation and Application of the Humanitarian Law Parameter
Supervisor: Prof. Marco Pertile; Co-Supervisor: Sondra Faccio

Various legal frameworks regulate arms exports, from international to regional and domestic laws; they use a slightly different language and only partially overlap, which leads to discrepancies in the application of the regulatory framework. At the international and European level, the exporting state should assess whether there is a risk that the weapons could be used to commit or facilitate the commission of serious violations of humanitarian law, and to deny authorisation if that risk exists. As recently stated by the ICRC, a gap appears to exist between the commitments expressed by states and their arms transfer practices.
This research examines arms exports authorised by states, with a focus on the limits imposed by humanitarian law. Violations of humanitarian law are analysed mainly from the perspective of selected exporting countries, considering their legal obligations alongside their actual practices. The study aims to understand how states interpret the humanitarian law criterion in their risk assessments, considering their international, regional and domestic arms export regimes.
Using an inductive approach, this research delves into the risk assessment of the exporting states when international humanitarian law is used as a parameter, considering state practices of a selected group of exporters (France, Italy, Germany, Spain, the UK and the US). State practices are derived from national reports, judicial rulings, and statements from parliamentary and governmental representatives. Notable practices of importing and non-exporting states supplement the results.
Not only are states’ practices systematically analysed, but the research also focuses on how exporting countries consider humanitarian law violations in their risk assessment procedures, a perspective which is often overlooked. Understanding how authorisations are granted and how assessments incorporate humanitarian law criteria can illuminate the effectiveness of existing rules and their actual implementation in preventing violations and reducing human suffering in armed conflicts.

14:30–15:00 – Francesca Ceccherini

Russia’s Foreign Policy Making in the “Near Abroad”: A Narrative and Visual Analysis of the Conflicts in Georgia and Ukraine
Supervisor: Alessandra Russo; Co-supervisor: Anna Casaglia

The ongoing war in Ukraine has renewed scholarly attention to Russia’s foreign policy and its evolving role in the post-Soviet space. While extensive research has examined the material dimension of Russia’s interventions, less attention has been paid to comparing how these wars were legitimated in each case, and why societal responses to them have varied.
This project compares Russia’s military interventions in Georgia (2008) and Ukraine (2014–2024), exploring how legitimating narratives—such as protecting Russian-speakers, defending sovereignty, and positioning Russia as a civilisational counterweight to the West—produced divergent domestic reactions.
Drawing on post-structuralist extensions of securitisation theory, the project conceptualises legitimation as a dynamic interaction of discourse, visuals, and identity. It combines discourse analysis of political speeches and documents with visual analysis of images in the context of war, examining convergence, divergence, and censorship in Russian media.
By uncovering continuities and ruptures in Russia’s legitimating practices, the research advances understanding of how legitimacy, discourse, and identity intersect in shaping Russia’s use of force and its reconfiguration of post-Soviet identity through conflict.

15:00–15:30 – Lorenzo Macellari

Beyond Exile: Ideology, Organisation, and the Political Effectiveness of the Iranian Diaspora in Europe
Supervisor: Pejman Abdolmahammadi; Co-supervisor: Prof. Fawaz Gerges (London School of Economics)

The Iranian diaspora in Europe has become an increasingly visible political actor, most notably during the Women, Life, Freedom movement of 2022–2023. Despite this prominence, existing scholarship has focused predominantly on North America or treated the Iranian diaspora as a homogeneous entity, overlooking the diversity of strategies, ideological orientations, and organisational forms that shape its effectiveness in Europe.
This thesis asks: What do the practices of Iranian diaspora organisations in Europe reveal about the relationship between ideological cohesion, organisational capacity, and political effectiveness in liberal democracies? It examines strategies, ideological evolution, and how internal divisions constrain or enable collective action.
Combining Critical Discourse Analysis, process tracing, and interviews, the research compares diaspora organisations in Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom to identify different models of mobilisation. By situating the Iranian diaspora within constructivist and transnationalist frameworks, the thesis conceptualises diasporas as contested political actors and norm entrepreneurs, offering a transferable model linking ideology, organisation, and host-country context.

16:00–16:30 – Asya Gasparyan

Mapping Variation: Qualitative Comparative Analysis of European States’ China Policies (1995–2024)
Supervisor: Paolo Rosa; Co-supervisor: Paolo Foradori

This research addresses an empirical puzzle in European politics: the divergent foreign policy responses to China between 1995 and 2024. While European countries have adopted relatively cohesive approaches to other global challenges, they have shown marked variation in their reactions to China, ranging from cooperation to hybrid strategies and confrontation. Existing scholarship has recognized this heterogeneity but remains limited in explanatory scope. Much of the literature relies on one-factor or additive models emphasizing either economic interdependence with China or strategic alignment with the United States, which are insufficient for capturing the causal complexity of foreign policy choices.
This study uses a case study approach focusing on Germany, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Hungary, Portugal, and Lithuania to investigate this puzzle. It asks: What combinations of domestic and international conditions explain why some European states adopt cooperative, hybrid, or confrontational policies toward China?
The analysis explores states’ reactions to major China-initiated foreign policy events from 1995 to 2024, examining how different factors interact to produce varied outcomes. The explanatory framework is structured around five conditions: threat perception, economic interdependence, reliance on the United States, government ideology, and strategic culture. Methodologically, the project employs fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) and process tracing to identify causal mechanisms across cases.
This study contributes to foreign policy analysis by systematically mapping the variation in the China policies of seven European states, showing that policy divergence reflects identifiable interactions between domestic and international conditions rather than random or single-factor explanations.

16:30–17:00 – Beatrice Rigon

Evaluating Anti-Corruption Measures: The Case of AID Systems
Supervisor: Prof. Andrea Di Nicola; Co-supervisor: Prof. Barbara Vettori (University of Naples Federico II)

Asset and interest disclosure (AID) systems are widely used tools to prevent corruption among public officials by promoting transparency and accountability. Although extensively discussed in anti-corruption literature, few studies examine AID systems comprehensively across Europe.
This research fills that gap by assessing the implementation and effectiveness of AID systems in EU Member and Candidate States. It maps the legal frameworks (“law in the books”) and investigates their practical functioning (“law in action”) through surveys and semi-structured interviews.
Drawing on rational theories of crime and situational crime prevention, the study develops a qualitative assessment of AID systems’ preventive role. It provides a framework to evaluate their contribution to corruption reduction and enriches the broader literature on governance and integrity in public administration.

17:00–17:30 – Robbert Stijn G. Thierens

The Legal Status of Critical Minerals in International Law: Emergence, Fragmentation, Consequences and Prospects
Supervisor: Sondra Faccio; Co-supervisor: Marco Pertile

The growing demand for critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and rare earth elements has become central to global energy transition, digital innovation, and security. States have responded with a variety of national and regional regulatory instruments, creating a “regulatory race” marked by fragmentation and overlapping definitions.
This research examines the legal status of critical minerals under international law, analysing their normative implications and the consequences of fragmented regulation. It traces how states define and prioritise critical minerals, and explores emerging obligations such as recycling, traceability, and supply security.
By connecting international resource law, trade, investment, and environmental law, the thesis aims to develop a principled legal framework for critical minerals, clarifying their position in the international legal order.