Pub Date : 2022-04-18DOI: 10.1080/13537113.2022.2056108
Hari Har Jnawali
Abstract Taking document analysis as its method, this article examines the impact of the European Parliament's (EP) support for the international recognition of Tibetan claims to self-determination. Conceding to various national and international pressures, the Tibetans have switched their demand from independence to autonomy. The EP has supported this demand and urged the Chinese government to recognize self-determination through autonomy and self-government. Against this background, this article examines - What is the impact of the EP’s support on the international recognition of the Tibetans’ right to self-determination? It argues that the EP’s support has further obstructed the recognition of the Tibetans’ self-determination. Interpreting the EP’s support as a violation of sovereign norms, the Chinese state has concentrated its efforts to prevent international support for Tibetan nationalism, and the EU is finding it difficult to contest the Chinese efforts due to its economic and strategic interests. It has not stood by its own parliament’s endorsement of self-determination through autonomy, nor has it made Tibetan nationalism a part of its human rights agenda. It has begun to adopt a universal human rights approach that does not address nationalist claims and prepares a permissive international environment for the Chinese government to ignore nationalist demands.
{"title":"Support of the European Parliament: Impact on Tibetan Claims to Self-Determination","authors":"Hari Har Jnawali","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2056108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2056108","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Taking document analysis as its method, this article examines the impact of the European Parliament's (EP) support for the international recognition of Tibetan claims to self-determination. Conceding to various national and international pressures, the Tibetans have switched their demand from independence to autonomy. The EP has supported this demand and urged the Chinese government to recognize self-determination through autonomy and self-government. Against this background, this article examines - What is the impact of the EP’s support on the international recognition of the Tibetans’ right to self-determination? It argues that the EP’s support has further obstructed the recognition of the Tibetans’ self-determination. Interpreting the EP’s support as a violation of sovereign norms, the Chinese state has concentrated its efforts to prevent international support for Tibetan nationalism, and the EU is finding it difficult to contest the Chinese efforts due to its economic and strategic interests. It has not stood by its own parliament’s endorsement of self-determination through autonomy, nor has it made Tibetan nationalism a part of its human rights agenda. It has begun to adopt a universal human rights approach that does not address nationalist claims and prepares a permissive international environment for the Chinese government to ignore nationalist demands.","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":"205 1","pages":"471 - 490"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86841510","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13537113.2022.2060363
A. Chater
The story of Indigenous peoples and the government of Canada in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is one of treaty violations, occupation of unceded territory, genocide, and discrimination by settlers. Progress has been immense over the last 50 years. The government of Pierre Trudeau’s 1969 White Paper called for the end of Indian Status and the Indian Act; only four years later, the Calder case recognized historical Indigenous land rights in a profound way. Nine years on, Indigenous rights were entrenched in Canada’s constitution. The strengthening of Indian status and historic land claim agreements followed. No doubt activism on the part of Indigenous peoples is a key explanatory variable. The 1970s and 1980s saw new recognition of human rights, equality, and the right to self-determination in the domestic context after the dismantling of legal segregation in North America as well as the creation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Still, this story is not (yet?) one that has a happy ending. Some Indigenous peoples have land claim agreements, while such autonomy remains elusive elsewhere; other groups have self-government agreements, while certain negotiations have dragged on for decades. Several Indigenous governments are powerful and effective, while others find themselves subservient to colonial powers on their own lands. There are commentators who laud the fact that funding for Indigenous services in Canada has increased, yet the standard of living for Indigenous peoples is still less on average compared to non-Indigenous Canadians. The four
{"title":"Empowering Indigenous Peoples through Self-Government: Progress and Challenges","authors":"A. Chater","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2060363","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2060363","url":null,"abstract":"The story of Indigenous peoples and the government of Canada in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is one of treaty violations, occupation of unceded territory, genocide, and discrimination by settlers. Progress has been immense over the last 50 years. The government of Pierre Trudeau’s 1969 White Paper called for the end of Indian Status and the Indian Act; only four years later, the Calder case recognized historical Indigenous land rights in a profound way. Nine years on, Indigenous rights were entrenched in Canada’s constitution. The strengthening of Indian status and historic land claim agreements followed. No doubt activism on the part of Indigenous peoples is a key explanatory variable. The 1970s and 1980s saw new recognition of human rights, equality, and the right to self-determination in the domestic context after the dismantling of legal segregation in North America as well as the creation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Still, this story is not (yet?) one that has a happy ending. Some Indigenous peoples have land claim agreements, while such autonomy remains elusive elsewhere; other groups have self-government agreements, while certain negotiations have dragged on for decades. Several Indigenous governments are powerful and effective, while others find themselves subservient to colonial powers on their own lands. There are commentators who laud the fact that funding for Indigenous services in Canada has increased, yet the standard of living for Indigenous peoples is still less on average compared to non-Indigenous Canadians. The four","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":"103 1","pages":"232 - 238"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80645196","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13537113.2022.2060401
S. L. Pinnell
women and men more clearly would have helped bring forward the human, rather than group-based, dimension of the “Armenian issue.” Thus, the perspectives of ordinary people get lost throughout the book. In this regard, Zabel Yesayan, an Armenian novelist, is worth mentioning in a detailed way because she was the only female intellectual targeted for arrest and deportation by the CUP. Centrally, the importance of political context that influenced the Turkish government’s approach is not clearly laid out throughout. While mentioning Turkish intellectuals’ anti-Armenian attitude, Cheterian refers to their support for Yaşar Kemal, a landmark name in Turkish literature, due to his comments criticizing state policies against the Kurds. According to the author, the same intellectuals were never interested in the “Armenian issue,” and so they were all distant (p. 137). This argument is ambiguous partly because Cheterian ignores the novelty of the “Armenian issue” for Turkish intellectuals. The final point is related to the editing of the book. Some Turkish words, including proper nouns, are misspelled and could be easily spotted by a native Turkish corrector. To conclude, Open Wounds shows how the past influences today through the critical aspects of the reception of the “Armenian issue.” It is a valuable and insightful analysis that could be beneficial to the general audience and the experts of the topic. It also reveals what the literature needs: a complete, thorough, and well-rounded historical evaluation of intellectual debates about the issue because not only the factuality but also how this issue has been debated through time provides us the strategies to heal the bleeding wounds.
{"title":"Central Peripheries: Nationhood in Central Asia","authors":"S. L. Pinnell","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2060401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2060401","url":null,"abstract":"women and men more clearly would have helped bring forward the human, rather than group-based, dimension of the “Armenian issue.” Thus, the perspectives of ordinary people get lost throughout the book. In this regard, Zabel Yesayan, an Armenian novelist, is worth mentioning in a detailed way because she was the only female intellectual targeted for arrest and deportation by the CUP. Centrally, the importance of political context that influenced the Turkish government’s approach is not clearly laid out throughout. While mentioning Turkish intellectuals’ anti-Armenian attitude, Cheterian refers to their support for Yaşar Kemal, a landmark name in Turkish literature, due to his comments criticizing state policies against the Kurds. According to the author, the same intellectuals were never interested in the “Armenian issue,” and so they were all distant (p. 137). This argument is ambiguous partly because Cheterian ignores the novelty of the “Armenian issue” for Turkish intellectuals. The final point is related to the editing of the book. Some Turkish words, including proper nouns, are misspelled and could be easily spotted by a native Turkish corrector. To conclude, Open Wounds shows how the past influences today through the critical aspects of the reception of the “Armenian issue.” It is a valuable and insightful analysis that could be beneficial to the general audience and the experts of the topic. It also reveals what the literature needs: a complete, thorough, and well-rounded historical evaluation of intellectual debates about the issue because not only the factuality but also how this issue has been debated through time provides us the strategies to heal the bleeding wounds.","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":"12 1 1","pages":"245 - 247"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90206790","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13537113.2022.2060378
F. Naz
by events. Nevertheless, from time to time, there are passages of the book that still resonate. For example, while explaining the changes in the impact of nationalism in the third period, he writes: “This does not mean that individuals became in this period more outrageously nationalist in sentiment or more unwilling to co-operate with their fellow-men of other nations” (p.15) and “evil men will always be found to turn an unhealthy situation to account” (p.23). How changes in the wider international context shape the character of political movements remains an area that deserves more attention than it typically receives. Another example: “The movement which dismembered Austria-Hungary and created Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia was bound to be succeeded by movements for the dismemberment of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia” (p.19). A critic might mutter that while events were ultimately to vindicate Carr’s judgment about the long-term future of these two countries, this was to take a number of generations. His postscript contains a statement that will raise a smile among readers; “It is conceivable that a shattered Europe, rising above the national hatreds and conflicts of the past, may throw up from within a new and unifying leadership which would enable her to develop and hold a position independent of both Britain and Russia” (p.59). Admittedly, both the “Britain” and “Russia” that Carr was envisaging when he wrote these words have long gone. Another part of the problem of the book, from the perspective of today’s readers, is that it advances propositions about the politically contingent nature of nationalism that have become so well established and so widely accepted that they do not require justification through reference to classic texts, whether by Carr or anyone else. Indeed, what most scholars of nationalism continue to grapple with is explaining the continuing potency of specific nationalisms, in spite of the debunking of nationalist myths of every kind. Included in the book are a series of endorsements of the new edition from leading scholars. Their warm welcome for its publication is primarily focused on Cox’s introduction. That is fully deserved. It may also be read as a suggestion to readers that they should not expect too much from Carr’s commentary itself.
{"title":"Why Do People Discriminate against Jews?","authors":"F. Naz","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2060378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2060378","url":null,"abstract":"by events. Nevertheless, from time to time, there are passages of the book that still resonate. For example, while explaining the changes in the impact of nationalism in the third period, he writes: “This does not mean that individuals became in this period more outrageously nationalist in sentiment or more unwilling to co-operate with their fellow-men of other nations” (p.15) and “evil men will always be found to turn an unhealthy situation to account” (p.23). How changes in the wider international context shape the character of political movements remains an area that deserves more attention than it typically receives. Another example: “The movement which dismembered Austria-Hungary and created Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia was bound to be succeeded by movements for the dismemberment of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia” (p.19). A critic might mutter that while events were ultimately to vindicate Carr’s judgment about the long-term future of these two countries, this was to take a number of generations. His postscript contains a statement that will raise a smile among readers; “It is conceivable that a shattered Europe, rising above the national hatreds and conflicts of the past, may throw up from within a new and unifying leadership which would enable her to develop and hold a position independent of both Britain and Russia” (p.59). Admittedly, both the “Britain” and “Russia” that Carr was envisaging when he wrote these words have long gone. Another part of the problem of the book, from the perspective of today’s readers, is that it advances propositions about the politically contingent nature of nationalism that have become so well established and so widely accepted that they do not require justification through reference to classic texts, whether by Carr or anyone else. Indeed, what most scholars of nationalism continue to grapple with is explaining the continuing potency of specific nationalisms, in spite of the debunking of nationalist myths of every kind. Included in the book are a series of endorsements of the new edition from leading scholars. Their warm welcome for its publication is primarily focused on Cox’s introduction. That is fully deserved. It may also be read as a suggestion to readers that they should not expect too much from Carr’s commentary itself.","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":"28 1","pages":"241 - 243"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78624380","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 : 2022-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13537113.2022.2060372
A. Guelke
{"title":"Nationalism and After (with New Introduction by Michael Cox)","authors":"A. Guelke","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2060372","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2060372","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":"240 - 241"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83118179","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 : 2022-03-24DOI: 10.1080/13537113.2022.2052594
Laurence Cooley
Abstract Making use of archival sources, this article reconstructs the decision-making process behind the addition of an Irish language question to the 1991 Northern Ireland census. It highlights a distinctive feature of the case: whereas such decisions usually result from state-society interactions, the question was rather suggested by the Irish government, using the role granted to it by the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement to act as a kin state to promote the cultural interests of nationalists in Northern Ireland. Officials in Belfast were initially reluctant to accede to this request, though feared refusal might result in a repeat of nationalist boycotts of previous censuses. Ultimately, the precedent set by language questions employed in Wales and Scotland made exclusion hard to justify and officials reluctantly agreed to the question, coming to see the precedent as a useful argument with which to fend off potential unionist opposition, which they feared might have resulted in a rival boycott. The inclusion of the question has subsequently had significant consequences for political claims-making about the status of the Irish language in Northern Ireland.
{"title":"“It Will Do No More than Annoy the Protestants”: The 1991 Northern Ireland Census and the Irish Language","authors":"Laurence Cooley","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2052594","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2052594","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Making use of archival sources, this article reconstructs the decision-making process behind the addition of an Irish language question to the 1991 Northern Ireland census. It highlights a distinctive feature of the case: whereas such decisions usually result from state-society interactions, the question was rather suggested by the Irish government, using the role granted to it by the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement to act as a kin state to promote the cultural interests of nationalists in Northern Ireland. Officials in Belfast were initially reluctant to accede to this request, though feared refusal might result in a repeat of nationalist boycotts of previous censuses. Ultimately, the precedent set by language questions employed in Wales and Scotland made exclusion hard to justify and officials reluctantly agreed to the question, coming to see the precedent as a useful argument with which to fend off potential unionist opposition, which they feared might have resulted in a rival boycott. The inclusion of the question has subsequently had significant consequences for political claims-making about the status of the Irish language in Northern Ireland.","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":"364 1","pages":"269 - 289"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83014295","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 : 2022-03-24DOI: 10.1080/13537113.2022.2047248
S. Vandeginste
Abstract Using a lifecycle perspective, this paper analyzes the use of reserved seats and the evolution of cooptation norms and practices in Burundi between the signature of the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement in 2000 and the 2020 legislative elections. Value-driven objectives, such as minority protection, only partly explain their use and design. The adoption, functionality and recent transformation of electoral cooptation were also determined by realpolitik, most notably by the elites’ struggle for positions and the balance of power. Cooptation had important effects on ethnic cohabitation within parliamentary factions. The paper contributes to the literature on the micro-institutions of power-sharing.
{"title":"Reserved Seats and Cooptation in Burundi (2000–2020)","authors":"S. Vandeginste","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2047248","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2047248","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Using a lifecycle perspective, this paper analyzes the use of reserved seats and the evolution of cooptation norms and practices in Burundi between the signature of the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement in 2000 and the 2020 legislative elections. Value-driven objectives, such as minority protection, only partly explain their use and design. The adoption, functionality and recent transformation of electoral cooptation were also determined by realpolitik, most notably by the elites’ struggle for positions and the balance of power. Cooptation had important effects on ethnic cohabitation within parliamentary factions. The paper contributes to the literature on the micro-institutions of power-sharing.","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":"21 1","pages":"249 - 268"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90668032","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 : 2022-02-15DOI: 10.1080/13537113.2022.2031689
B. Rabinowitz
Abstract With the 21st century surge of populism, a debate has emerged over the relationship between nationalism and populism. Some scholars maintain these two phenomena are distinct and should be analytically differentiated; others hold the difference between the two is primarily an artifact of how the scholarship has evolved around each. To bridge these positions, this paper argues that by reorganizing our typologies of nationalism, we can better account for why populism seems to have become fused with nationalism. To do so, it introduces a new typology that distinguishes among state-creating, state-consolidating and state-defensive nationalisms. Applying this new typology, the case made is that we are experiencing a convergence of populism and nationalism today because we are currently in an era of defensive nationalism.
{"title":"Defensive Nationalism: Where Populism Meets Nationalism","authors":"B. Rabinowitz","doi":"10.1080/13537113.2022.2031689","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2022.2031689","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract With the 21st century surge of populism, a debate has emerged over the relationship between nationalism and populism. Some scholars maintain these two phenomena are distinct and should be analytically differentiated; others hold the difference between the two is primarily an artifact of how the scholarship has evolved around each. To bridge these positions, this paper argues that by reorganizing our typologies of nationalism, we can better account for why populism seems to have become fused with nationalism. To do so, it introduces a new typology that distinguishes among state-creating, state-consolidating and state-defensive nationalisms. Applying this new typology, the case made is that we are experiencing a convergence of populism and nationalism today because we are currently in an era of defensive nationalism.","PeriodicalId":45342,"journal":{"name":"Nationalism and Ethnic Politics","volume":"12 1","pages":"143 - 164"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75413111","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：