Pub Date : 2021-06-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211010667
Liridona Veliu
Prevailing studies on silence and democracy, in spite of silence’s inherently ambiguous nature, focus on subscribing meaning(s) to silence. Such attempts of turning silence into speech, point to an adversary relationship between silence and democratic theory. First, this article conducts an onto-epistemological critique of democratic theory’s treatment of silence (as meaning). Second, it suggests that there are self-reflective analytical benefits for scholars of democratic theory should they broaden up their gaze from silence as meaning toward silence-as-doing. This article argues that this can be done by shifting the epistemological focus from interpreting possible meanings behind the nonvoters’ silence into analyzing the context and/of interpretations of silence as ambiguous. Third, to illustrate this, the article uses the 2018 name referendum in North Macedonia which shows how the speech-centered approach of democratic theory is utilized to serve political goals rather than reaching the democratic ideal of “everyone having a vo-ice/te.”
{"title":"The sounds of silence: Democracy and the referendum on (FYRO)/(North) Macedonia","authors":"Liridona Veliu","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211010667","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211010667","url":null,"abstract":"Prevailing studies on silence and democracy, in spite of silence’s inherently ambiguous nature, focus on subscribing meaning(s) to silence. Such attempts of turning silence into speech, point to an adversary relationship between silence and democratic theory. First, this article conducts an onto-epistemological critique of democratic theory’s treatment of silence (as meaning). Second, it suggests that there are self-reflective analytical benefits for scholars of democratic theory should they broaden up their gaze from silence as meaning toward silence-as-doing. This article argues that this can be done by shifting the epistemological focus from interpreting possible meanings behind the nonvoters’ silence into analyzing the context and/of interpretations of silence as ambiguous. Third, to illustrate this, the article uses the 2018 name referendum in North Macedonia which shows how the speech-centered approach of democratic theory is utilized to serve political goals rather than reaching the democratic ideal of “everyone having a vo-ice/te.”","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84638125","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-15DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211009107
Mats Braun
In several respects it is easy to agree with Anatol Lieven. To deal with the issue of climate change we need governance with a high level of legitimacy and trust, and the strategy needs to be long term for the present generation to accept sacrifices for the benefit of future generations. Yet is nationalism the political doctrine that could help the world to deliver on the need to decrease greenhouse gas emissions? Is nationalism, an ideology of the 19th century, the correct answer to the biggest challenge of the 21st century? First, I do not think many writers on nationalism dispute the positive aspects of nationalism. At least, if we look at authors in the modernist tradition, authors like Miroslav Hroch (1993) and Benedict Anderson (1983) and others do not dispute the important role of nationalism for the development of democracy and welfare states. In other contexts, authors working in a postcolonial tradition have suggested the crucial role of nationalism for emancipation and state building (see, e.g. Herr, 2003). Thus, a large part of the argumentation provided by Lieven on nationalism opens doors that already are wide open. Yet, the book is relevant. Lieven identifies and provides a correct problem description. The question of climate change responses is all about how we can find a narrative that allows us to act and make people feel included in the decision-making. This is in particular the case if we agree that to deal with climate change life style changes are necessary that go well beyond ideas of ecological modernization that would suggest that we could mitigate climate change efficiently through technological innovations and without reforms costly also in the long term. Yet, to argue that nationalism is the doctrine suitable for the task is a bold claim that the book provides little evidence of. I see at least three major objections. First, if we go beyond the US context and look for instance at Europe, as I will do in this intervention, the nation states can hardly
{"title":"Why nationalism is not the right doctrine to combat climate change – A Central European perspective","authors":"Mats Braun","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211009107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211009107","url":null,"abstract":"In several respects it is easy to agree with Anatol Lieven. To deal with the issue of climate change we need governance with a high level of legitimacy and trust, and the strategy needs to be long term for the present generation to accept sacrifices for the benefit of future generations. Yet is nationalism the political doctrine that could help the world to deliver on the need to decrease greenhouse gas emissions? Is nationalism, an ideology of the 19th century, the correct answer to the biggest challenge of the 21st century? First, I do not think many writers on nationalism dispute the positive aspects of nationalism. At least, if we look at authors in the modernist tradition, authors like Miroslav Hroch (1993) and Benedict Anderson (1983) and others do not dispute the important role of nationalism for the development of democracy and welfare states. In other contexts, authors working in a postcolonial tradition have suggested the crucial role of nationalism for emancipation and state building (see, e.g. Herr, 2003). Thus, a large part of the argumentation provided by Lieven on nationalism opens doors that already are wide open. Yet, the book is relevant. Lieven identifies and provides a correct problem description. The question of climate change responses is all about how we can find a narrative that allows us to act and make people feel included in the decision-making. This is in particular the case if we agree that to deal with climate change life style changes are necessary that go well beyond ideas of ecological modernization that would suggest that we could mitigate climate change efficiently through technological innovations and without reforms costly also in the long term. Yet, to argue that nationalism is the doctrine suitable for the task is a bold claim that the book provides little evidence of. I see at least three major objections. First, if we go beyond the US context and look for instance at Europe, as I will do in this intervention, the nation states can hardly","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82631817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-13DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211009093
R. Hallam
One of the best books on the climate crisis over the past 10 years, maybe the best book, is Anatol Lieven’s Climate Change and the Nation State. This is not because it is particularly original in its basic arguments about the nature of the political world. It presents a solidly realist argument with its many strengths and weaknesses. It is a great book because Lieven has the courage to expose the appalling inability of the various political realist communities to grasp the seriousness of the exponentially increasing threat to the very existence of organised human life. The failure of modern conservatives to deal effectively with the terror that is coming down the road must be the most powerful case study of the inability of humans to act in accordance with their beliefs and self-interest. Lieven accepts his faith in Enlightenment values is shaken by this failure. I would argue such faith is shattered on the floor. We are heading into the greatest period of social breakdown in world history and conservatives are betraying in their most basic value – the hint is in the name. They stand by while the consequence of state inaction is the tearing apart of the very fabric our societies. Is it eye watering stupidity, is it entrancement by an infinite evil, or it is just ‘one bloody thing after another’ writ large – writ on an infinite scale? People will debate this greatest of all betrayals for centuries to come, on the questionable assumption future societies will still value debate. As an award winning researcher in political mobilisation at King’s College I initiated the Extinction Rebellion movement with a presentation called ‘Pivoting to the real issue’ (note the word ‘real’) in January 2018. I produced the core strategic framework of mass civil disobedience for the movement which went on to become the number one global influencer on the climate in 2019, and spread to 70 odd countries, inspiring thousands to get arrested. It was a desperate attempt to persuade the elites of their last change to turn the world back from triggering the numerous geo physical and biological feedbacks which threaten to decimate the habitats upon which our existence depends. It failed. And the main reason for this failure was the unwillingness of the liberal and conservative political class to look beyond the pathetic distractions of their culture wars to see that preventing climate breakdown is the most serious political imperative of all time.
{"title":"Reality for realists: Climate Change and the Nation State","authors":"R. Hallam","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211009093","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211009093","url":null,"abstract":"One of the best books on the climate crisis over the past 10 years, maybe the best book, is Anatol Lieven’s Climate Change and the Nation State. This is not because it is particularly original in its basic arguments about the nature of the political world. It presents a solidly realist argument with its many strengths and weaknesses. It is a great book because Lieven has the courage to expose the appalling inability of the various political realist communities to grasp the seriousness of the exponentially increasing threat to the very existence of organised human life. The failure of modern conservatives to deal effectively with the terror that is coming down the road must be the most powerful case study of the inability of humans to act in accordance with their beliefs and self-interest. Lieven accepts his faith in Enlightenment values is shaken by this failure. I would argue such faith is shattered on the floor. We are heading into the greatest period of social breakdown in world history and conservatives are betraying in their most basic value – the hint is in the name. They stand by while the consequence of state inaction is the tearing apart of the very fabric our societies. Is it eye watering stupidity, is it entrancement by an infinite evil, or it is just ‘one bloody thing after another’ writ large – writ on an infinite scale? People will debate this greatest of all betrayals for centuries to come, on the questionable assumption future societies will still value debate. As an award winning researcher in political mobilisation at King’s College I initiated the Extinction Rebellion movement with a presentation called ‘Pivoting to the real issue’ (note the word ‘real’) in January 2018. I produced the core strategic framework of mass civil disobedience for the movement which went on to become the number one global influencer on the climate in 2019, and spread to 70 odd countries, inspiring thousands to get arrested. It was a desperate attempt to persuade the elites of their last change to turn the world back from triggering the numerous geo physical and biological feedbacks which threaten to decimate the habitats upon which our existence depends. It failed. And the main reason for this failure was the unwillingness of the liberal and conservative political class to look beyond the pathetic distractions of their culture wars to see that preventing climate breakdown is the most serious political imperative of all time.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82907484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-13DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211009106
D. Bursać, Dušan Vučićević
The 2020 elections in Serbia were held on 21st of June, as the first elections in Europe since the outbreak of coronavirus pandemic. The pre-electoral period was marked by the announcement of boycott from opposition, followed by a number of attempts of ruling party to mitigate the potential negative effects. The decision of opposition to restrain from participation came as a response to the long-term accusations of heavily biased electoral and media conditions, which culminated in EU-mediated (but largely unsuccessful) roundtable talks in 2019. On a larger scale, the administration headed by the President Aleksandar Vučić is becoming increasingly authoritarian, with several indices now classifying Serbia as a hybrid regime. As expected, the elections brought a convincing victory to Vučić’s Serbian Progressive Party, which won 188 out of 250 seats. Despite the overwhelming triumph, government was formed more than four months later. This paper is contributing to the literature on actors’ strategies in hybrid regimes. Although only short-term effects of the boycott could be assessed, the 2020 elections in Serbia demonstrate that legitimacy of the regime cannot be endangered if the opposition is not supported by international actors, and moreover, that the election results have only strengthened the regime.
{"title":"Election boycott in a hybrid regime: The case of 2020 parliamentary elections in Serbia","authors":"D. Bursać, Dušan Vučićević","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211009106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211009106","url":null,"abstract":"The 2020 elections in Serbia were held on 21st of June, as the first elections in Europe since the outbreak of coronavirus pandemic. The pre-electoral period was marked by the announcement of boycott from opposition, followed by a number of attempts of ruling party to mitigate the potential negative effects. The decision of opposition to restrain from participation came as a response to the long-term accusations of heavily biased electoral and media conditions, which culminated in EU-mediated (but largely unsuccessful) roundtable talks in 2019. On a larger scale, the administration headed by the President Aleksandar Vučić is becoming increasingly authoritarian, with several indices now classifying Serbia as a hybrid regime. As expected, the elections brought a convincing victory to Vučić’s Serbian Progressive Party, which won 188 out of 250 seats. Despite the overwhelming triumph, government was formed more than four months later. This paper is contributing to the literature on actors’ strategies in hybrid regimes. Although only short-term effects of the boycott could be assessed, the 2020 elections in Serbia demonstrate that legitimacy of the regime cannot be endangered if the opposition is not supported by international actors, and moreover, that the election results have only strengthened the regime.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82962012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-13DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211009097
Miriam Matejová
I have a soft spot for realism. While I find the realist worldview at times pessimistic and often incomplete, the logic and mechanics of power, prudence, and self-help have frequently aligned with my Central European roots. Educated in Canada, I have studied both environmental and security issues separately—the former due to my growing awareness of the risks that environmental degradation poses to human societies and the latter mostly due to the lure of realist explanations of the world. Anatol Lieven’s book immediately appealed to my academic split personality. In Climate Change and the Nation State: The Case for Nationalism in a Warming World, Lieven makes a convincing case that climate change is the greatest security threat to the long-term interests of the world’s Great Powers. Crises and especially climate-exacerbated migration will make it difficult for states to achieve political consensus and act on climate change. Lieven paints a scary future, whether we get there gradually or abruptly. It is a world of not only devastating impacts from climate change (e.g., droughts, sudden disasters) but also a world where growing social and political disruptions outgrow states’ security forces and draw in militaries for domestic control (Lieven, 2020: 9). Meaningful action will require a push against contemporary culture, consumerism, and our increasingly shorter attention spans—and according to Lieven, that push can only come from a place of fear that something threatens one’s nation. A long-sighted, civic (as opposed to ethnic) nationalism can generate such fear (Lieven, 2020: 84). Lieven (2020: 76) argues that nationalism is the one force that overcomes the problem of sacrifice by current generations for future generations, the problem that must be solved in order to address climate change effectively. Nationalism legitimizes that sacrifice and makes sense of it. Calling for a political compromise and centrist attitude, Lieven proposes two specific steps: state militaries must
{"title":"From realist to pragmatic solutions to climate change: Reading Anatol Lieven’s Climate Change and the Nation State","authors":"Miriam Matejová","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211009097","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211009097","url":null,"abstract":"I have a soft spot for realism. While I find the realist worldview at times pessimistic and often incomplete, the logic and mechanics of power, prudence, and self-help have frequently aligned with my Central European roots. Educated in Canada, I have studied both environmental and security issues separately—the former due to my growing awareness of the risks that environmental degradation poses to human societies and the latter mostly due to the lure of realist explanations of the world. Anatol Lieven’s book immediately appealed to my academic split personality. In Climate Change and the Nation State: The Case for Nationalism in a Warming World, Lieven makes a convincing case that climate change is the greatest security threat to the long-term interests of the world’s Great Powers. Crises and especially climate-exacerbated migration will make it difficult for states to achieve political consensus and act on climate change. Lieven paints a scary future, whether we get there gradually or abruptly. It is a world of not only devastating impacts from climate change (e.g., droughts, sudden disasters) but also a world where growing social and political disruptions outgrow states’ security forces and draw in militaries for domestic control (Lieven, 2020: 9). Meaningful action will require a push against contemporary culture, consumerism, and our increasingly shorter attention spans—and according to Lieven, that push can only come from a place of fear that something threatens one’s nation. A long-sighted, civic (as opposed to ethnic) nationalism can generate such fear (Lieven, 2020: 84). Lieven (2020: 76) argues that nationalism is the one force that overcomes the problem of sacrifice by current generations for future generations, the problem that must be solved in order to address climate change effectively. Nationalism legitimizes that sacrifice and makes sense of it. Calling for a political compromise and centrist attitude, Lieven proposes two specific steps: state militaries must","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80211813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-09DOI: 10.1177/2336825X21995702
A. Hoyle, Helma van den Berg, B. Doosje, Martijn Kitzen
Hostile political actors frequently engage in malign information influence, projecting antagonistic strategic narratives in targeted societies to manipulate the information environment and distort the perceptions of the citizens. Research examining malign information influence is growing, but more attention could be given to its psychological effects. Information operations are commonly assumed to affect the levels of trust and the emotional experiences of citizens who are targeted by them, but these notions are currently supported by limited evidence. We propose that experimental psychological research is a promising avenue to more clearly demonstrate these effects and individual differences of the target audience that may exacerbate these effects. This article discusses the knowledge gap regarding the psychological effects of malign information influence and suggests relevant psychological research that can be built upon when devising experimental studies that might address it. Finally, the article outlines key benefits that insights gleaned from this experimental research would offer to those seeking to counter malign information influence.
{"title":"Grey matters: Advancing a psychological effects-based approach to countering malign information influence","authors":"A. Hoyle, Helma van den Berg, B. Doosje, Martijn Kitzen","doi":"10.1177/2336825X21995702","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X21995702","url":null,"abstract":"Hostile political actors frequently engage in malign information influence, projecting antagonistic strategic narratives in targeted societies to manipulate the information environment and distort the perceptions of the citizens. Research examining malign information influence is growing, but more attention could be given to its psychological effects. Information operations are commonly assumed to affect the levels of trust and the emotional experiences of citizens who are targeted by them, but these notions are currently supported by limited evidence. We propose that experimental psychological research is a promising avenue to more clearly demonstrate these effects and individual differences of the target audience that may exacerbate these effects. This article discusses the knowledge gap regarding the psychological effects of malign information influence and suggests relevant psychological research that can be built upon when devising experimental studies that might address it. Finally, the article outlines key benefits that insights gleaned from this experimental research would offer to those seeking to counter malign information influence.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73720796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825X20984340
Aliaksei Kazharski
The rigged 2020 presidential election in Belarus, as well as the disproportionate use of violence by authorities and multiple reports of tortures of detainees served as a catalyst for the Belarusian society. The mass protests that ensued were on a scale unseen since the 1990’s. Mass mobilization of citizens during Sunday rallies as well as grassroot activity and the rise of local communities led some to proclaim the birth of a new civic society and even a new Belarusian political nation (Przybylski, 2020). The ultimate validity of these statements can be fully evaluated only with the benefit of hindsight, which we do not have as of the time of writing. One can nevertheless safely argue that unprecedented mass political mobilization and new forms of horizontal solidarity are important contributions to nation building—which, in the social constructivist paradigm, should be understood as a never-ending process rather than a singular event. This line of thought has been previously developed by authors who understand nations and nation-states as performing their identities through various genres of cultural production (e.g. Shapiro, 2004). This contribution focuses on symbolic politics of the protest movement as ‘‘signifying practices’’ (Hall, 1997) and examines ways in which these practices reappropriate crucial symbolic legacies in order to articulate a new political subject through representations of an anti-Lukashenka majority. Following a discussion of the broader context of identity building in the post-Communist Belarus, I provide an empirical analysis of two key legacies recycled by the protests. The first one is the political legacy of Belarusian national revivalism and its symbols that quickly became the dominant visual theme in the protests. Though, in their origin, these symbols were closely linked to ethnocultural Belarusian nationalism, the protest movement has worked to resignify them into
{"title":"Belarus’ new political nation? 2020 anti-authoritarian protests as identity building","authors":"Aliaksei Kazharski","doi":"10.1177/2336825X20984340","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X20984340","url":null,"abstract":"The rigged 2020 presidential election in Belarus, as well as the disproportionate use of violence by authorities and multiple reports of tortures of detainees served as a catalyst for the Belarusian society. The mass protests that ensued were on a scale unseen since the 1990’s. Mass mobilization of citizens during Sunday rallies as well as grassroot activity and the rise of local communities led some to proclaim the birth of a new civic society and even a new Belarusian political nation (Przybylski, 2020). The ultimate validity of these statements can be fully evaluated only with the benefit of hindsight, which we do not have as of the time of writing. One can nevertheless safely argue that unprecedented mass political mobilization and new forms of horizontal solidarity are important contributions to nation building—which, in the social constructivist paradigm, should be understood as a never-ending process rather than a singular event. This line of thought has been previously developed by authors who understand nations and nation-states as performing their identities through various genres of cultural production (e.g. Shapiro, 2004). This contribution focuses on symbolic politics of the protest movement as ‘‘signifying practices’’ (Hall, 1997) and examines ways in which these practices reappropriate crucial symbolic legacies in order to articulate a new political subject through representations of an anti-Lukashenka majority. Following a discussion of the broader context of identity building in the post-Communist Belarus, I provide an empirical analysis of two key legacies recycled by the protests. The first one is the political legacy of Belarusian national revivalism and its symbols that quickly became the dominant visual theme in the protests. Though, in their origin, these symbols were closely linked to ethnocultural Belarusian nationalism, the protest movement has worked to resignify them into","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83770551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825x20983743
G. Mykhailiuk, Larry A. DiMatteo
The right to freedom of peaceful assembly is guaranteed by Article 39 of the Ukrainian Constitution. However, there is no stand-alone law or case law that defines, regulates and supports the process of organizing and conducting peaceful assemblies. This is largely due to the fact that until the 2014 Maidan Revolution (Euromaidan), Ukraine’s history was one of autocratic rule. This article argues that given this historical context, secondary legislation is needed to safeguard this freedom and entrench it into Ukrainian legal culture. The idea of the right to peaceful assembly is sacrosanct. This article analyses the key elements needed to transform this idea into an ideal law. For example, any such legislation should follow the spirit of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), especially in the area of limitations of the personal freedom. Ukraine has moved forward on a broad reform agenda including reforms of the judiciary in order to create an independent and competent court system. It is widely recognized that such a system is needed to fight widespread corruption. The article argues that now is the time to enact a law on peaceful assembly in order to elevate Ukraine’s legal system to EU and international standards.
{"title":"Creating a comprehensive peaceful assembly law for Ukraine: Idea and ideal","authors":"G. Mykhailiuk, Larry A. DiMatteo","doi":"10.1177/2336825x20983743","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825x20983743","url":null,"abstract":"The right to freedom of peaceful assembly is guaranteed by Article 39 of the Ukrainian Constitution. However, there is no stand-alone law or case law that defines, regulates and supports the process of organizing and conducting peaceful assemblies. This is largely due to the fact that until the 2014 Maidan Revolution (Euromaidan), Ukraine’s history was one of autocratic rule. This article argues that given this historical context, secondary legislation is needed to safeguard this freedom and entrench it into Ukrainian legal culture. The idea of the right to peaceful assembly is sacrosanct. This article analyses the key elements needed to transform this idea into an ideal law. For example, any such legislation should follow the spirit of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), especially in the area of limitations of the personal freedom. Ukraine has moved forward on a broad reform agenda including reforms of the judiciary in order to create an independent and competent court system. It is widely recognized that such a system is needed to fight widespread corruption. The article argues that now is the time to enact a law on peaceful assembly in order to elevate Ukraine’s legal system to EU and international standards.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78963717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825X20984331
Piotr Rudkouski
In 2020, we have witnessed unprecedented mass mobilization of Belarusians against autocracy and lawlessness. The durability of protests, scale of solidarity, ability of self-organization, and readiness to accept serious risks seem to testify to the fact that the demand for democracy is rooted in the value sphere. There is, however, a distinctly Belarusian problem in this context, relating to national identity. In this forum contribution, I will first specify the problem of Belarusian national identity and provide evidence of its weakness. Second, I will argue that Belarusians tend to compensate for the weakness of their national identity by reinforcing a supranational identity. The ‘Russian World’ (Russkiy mir) currently fulfils this function. Third, I will show that Belarusians are relatively eurosceptic, and suggest that this is a byproduct of attachment to Russianness as a substitute for national identity.
{"title":"Russia’s cultural leverage in Belarus","authors":"Piotr Rudkouski","doi":"10.1177/2336825X20984331","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X20984331","url":null,"abstract":"In 2020, we have witnessed unprecedented mass mobilization of Belarusians against autocracy and lawlessness. The durability of protests, scale of solidarity, ability of self-organization, and readiness to accept serious risks seem to testify to the fact that the demand for democracy is rooted in the value sphere. There is, however, a distinctly Belarusian problem in this context, relating to national identity. In this forum contribution, I will first specify the problem of Belarusian national identity and provide evidence of its weakness. Second, I will argue that Belarusians tend to compensate for the weakness of their national identity by reinforcing a supranational identity. The ‘Russian World’ (Russkiy mir) currently fulfils this function. Third, I will show that Belarusians are relatively eurosceptic, and suggest that this is a byproduct of attachment to Russianness as a substitute for national identity.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88052644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825X20984337
Alla Leukavets
It is sometimes claimed that during his 26 years of rule Lukashenka has acted as a guarantor of Belarusian sovereignty (Preiherman, 2018; Tsikhamirau, 2018). According to this point of view, as long as Lukashenka stays in power, Russia will not be able to fully control Belarus. This paper will argue that although during Lukashenka’s time in office Belarus has avoided deeper integration with Russia within the Union State, the Belarusian regime has failed to reduce the country’s economic dependence on its eastern neighbor. This provided the Kremlin with leverage to control Belarus, compromising its sovereignty. The extent of the leverage became particularly evident in the wake of the 2020 presidential elections when the survival of the Belarusian regime proved to be contingent on Russia’s support. The Kremlin’s generous economic assistance over the last 26 years has created a “sponsored authoritarianism” in Belarus. Lukashenka’s role in it is to ensure that the country will not leave the orbit of Russia’s influence and drift to the West while the Kremlin attempts to realize a soft mode of occupation of Belarus via deep economic and political integration under the auspices of unified supranational bodies. The paper starts by analyzing different phases in Belarus-Russia relations in 2000–2020 and argues that the recent presidential elections in Belarus have become a new critical juncture. The work proceeds with assessing the extent of Russia’s economic leverage over Belarus in 2000–2020 by focusing on three main components: 1) Belarus-Russia bilateral trade 2) Belarus’s energy dependence on Russia 3) Russia’s financial support to Belarus. The paper demonstrates that by the time of the 2020 presidential elections none of these components have been reduced, thus making the Belarusian regime vulnerable to Kremlin’s pressure. The work concludes by discussing the trajectory of Belarus’s future regardless of whether Lukashenka stays in power or leaves office and argues that the Belarusian protests represent both a challenge and an opportunity for the Kremlin.
{"title":"Russia’s game in Belarus: 2020 presidential elections as a checkmate for Lukashenka?","authors":"Alla Leukavets","doi":"10.1177/2336825X20984337","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X20984337","url":null,"abstract":"It is sometimes claimed that during his 26 years of rule Lukashenka has acted as a guarantor of Belarusian sovereignty (Preiherman, 2018; Tsikhamirau, 2018). According to this point of view, as long as Lukashenka stays in power, Russia will not be able to fully control Belarus. This paper will argue that although during Lukashenka’s time in office Belarus has avoided deeper integration with Russia within the Union State, the Belarusian regime has failed to reduce the country’s economic dependence on its eastern neighbor. This provided the Kremlin with leverage to control Belarus, compromising its sovereignty. The extent of the leverage became particularly evident in the wake of the 2020 presidential elections when the survival of the Belarusian regime proved to be contingent on Russia’s support. The Kremlin’s generous economic assistance over the last 26 years has created a “sponsored authoritarianism” in Belarus. Lukashenka’s role in it is to ensure that the country will not leave the orbit of Russia’s influence and drift to the West while the Kremlin attempts to realize a soft mode of occupation of Belarus via deep economic and political integration under the auspices of unified supranational bodies. The paper starts by analyzing different phases in Belarus-Russia relations in 2000–2020 and argues that the recent presidential elections in Belarus have become a new critical juncture. The work proceeds with assessing the extent of Russia’s economic leverage over Belarus in 2000–2020 by focusing on three main components: 1) Belarus-Russia bilateral trade 2) Belarus’s energy dependence on Russia 3) Russia’s financial support to Belarus. The paper demonstrates that by the time of the 2020 presidential elections none of these components have been reduced, thus making the Belarusian regime vulnerable to Kremlin’s pressure. The work concludes by discussing the trajectory of Belarus’s future regardless of whether Lukashenka stays in power or leaves office and argues that the Belarusian protests represent both a challenge and an opportunity for the Kremlin.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82424025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：