Pub Date : 2022-07-25DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2091314
Biao Xiang, W. Allen, S. Khosravi, Hélène Neveu Kringelbach, Yasmin Y. Ortiga, Karen Anne S. Liao, Jorge E. Cuéllar, L. Momen, P. Deshingkar, Mukta Naik
ABSTRACT The COVID-19 pandemic and interventions addressing it raise important questions about human mobility that have geopolitical implications. This forum uses mobility and immobility during the pandemic as lenses onto the ways that routinised state power reacts to acute uncertainties, as well as how these reactions impact politics and societies. Specifically, we propose the concept of “shock mobility” as migratory routines radically reconfigured: emergency flights from epicentres, mass repatriations, lockdowns, quarantines. Patterns of shock mobility and immobility are not new categories of movement, but rather are significant alterations to the timing, duration, intensity, and relations among existing movements. Many of these alterations have been induced by governments’ reactions to the pandemic in both migrant-sending and receiving contexts, which can be especially consequential for migrants in and from the Global South. Our interventions explore these processes by highlighting experiences of Afghans and Kurds along Iran’s borders, Western Africans in Europe, Filipino workers, irregular Bangladeshis in Qatar, Central Americans travelling northwards via Mexico, and rural-urban migrants in India. In total, we argue that tracing shocks’ dynamics in a comparative manner provides an analytical means for assessing the long-term implications of the pandemic, building theories about how and why any particular post-crisis world emerges as it does, and paving the way for future empirical work.
{"title":"Shock Mobilities During Moments of Acute Uncertainty","authors":"Biao Xiang, W. Allen, S. Khosravi, Hélène Neveu Kringelbach, Yasmin Y. Ortiga, Karen Anne S. Liao, Jorge E. Cuéllar, L. Momen, P. Deshingkar, Mukta Naik","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2091314","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2091314","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The COVID-19 pandemic and interventions addressing it raise important questions about human mobility that have geopolitical implications. This forum uses mobility and immobility during the pandemic as lenses onto the ways that routinised state power reacts to acute uncertainties, as well as how these reactions impact politics and societies. Specifically, we propose the concept of “shock mobility” as migratory routines radically reconfigured: emergency flights from epicentres, mass repatriations, lockdowns, quarantines. Patterns of shock mobility and immobility are not new categories of movement, but rather are significant alterations to the timing, duration, intensity, and relations among existing movements. Many of these alterations have been induced by governments’ reactions to the pandemic in both migrant-sending and receiving contexts, which can be especially consequential for migrants in and from the Global South. Our interventions explore these processes by highlighting experiences of Afghans and Kurds along Iran’s borders, Western Africans in Europe, Filipino workers, irregular Bangladeshis in Qatar, Central Americans travelling northwards via Mexico, and rural-urban migrants in India. In total, we argue that tracing shocks’ dynamics in a comparative manner provides an analytical means for assessing the long-term implications of the pandemic, building theories about how and why any particular post-crisis world emerges as it does, and paving the way for future empirical work.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"1632 - 1657"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42434135","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-20DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2094776
D. Lutterbeck
ABSTRACT Migration scholarship has thus far largely neglected the role of aircraft in both (irregular) migration and state policies aimed at controlling migration. Drawing inspiration from the field of strategic studies, where ‘airpower’ has been a key theoretical concept, this article explores the role of aerial assets in states’ migration control efforts. The article discusses three main dimensions of the use of airpower in controlling migration: the increasing resort to aircraft for border enforcement purposes – or what can be referred to as ‘vertical border policing’ –, states’ tight monitoring of the aerial migration infrastructure, and the use of aircraft in migrant return operations. As a core element of state power, it is airpower’s key features of reach, speed and height which have made it a particularly useful migration control instrument.
{"title":"Airpower and Migration Control","authors":"D. Lutterbeck","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2094776","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2094776","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Migration scholarship has thus far largely neglected the role of aircraft in both (irregular) migration and state policies aimed at controlling migration. Drawing inspiration from the field of strategic studies, where ‘airpower’ has been a key theoretical concept, this article explores the role of aerial assets in states’ migration control efforts. The article discusses three main dimensions of the use of airpower in controlling migration: the increasing resort to aircraft for border enforcement purposes – or what can be referred to as ‘vertical border policing’ –, states’ tight monitoring of the aerial migration infrastructure, and the use of aircraft in migrant return operations. As a core element of state power, it is airpower’s key features of reach, speed and height which have made it a particularly useful migration control instrument.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"2016 - 2041"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41662960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-18DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2086459
R. Torres, Sarah A. Blue, Caroline V. Faria, Tamara Segura, Kate Swanson
{"title":"“Asylum is Not for Mexicans”: Unaccompanied Youth and Racio-Governance at the US Border","authors":"R. Torres, Sarah A. Blue, Caroline V. Faria, Tamara Segura, Kate Swanson","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2086459","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2086459","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48132883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-12DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2094773
Gerhard Rainer, Simon Dudek
ABSTRACT For decades, German geographers’ entanglement with Nazi rule has been described as primarily related to geopolitics and, more specifically, to the figure of Karl Haushofer – the ‘black sheep’ of an otherwise ‘scientific’ discipline. While research has been dismantling this ‘Haushoferism’ since the 1980s, the academic geography environment in which Haushofer was embedded in Munich has not been studied thus far. The present article seeks to fill this lacuna. In doing so, it aims to enhance our understanding of the relationship between geography, geopolitics, and Nazi rule. Through a biographical analysis, we investigate the work of three key geography scholars at Munich’s Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU): the two consecutive chairholders in geography (Erich von Drygalski [1906–1935] and Fritz Machatschek [1935–1946]) and Haushofer’s closest academic disciple (Gustav Fochler-Hauke). Building on archival research, complemented by an analysis of these geographers’ writings, we focus on 1) the relationship between geographical and geopolitical thought development at LMU and 2) the entanglement of Fochler-Hauke and Machatschek with Nazi rule. Our analysis shows that geographical and geopolitical thought were inextricably linked. Whereas much research has focused on (Haushofer and) the development of geopolitics, geographers’ increasing transformation into Kämpfende Wissenschaftler [fighting scholars] has been neglected. This applied, practical-political orientation of geography, which aimed to sustain and support the expansionary National Socialist project, characterised the development of the discipline at LMU during the Nazi period.
摘要几十年来，德国地理学家与纳粹统治的纠缠一直被描述为主要与地缘政治有关，更具体地说，与卡尔·豪斯霍费尔（Karl Haushofer）这一“科学”学科的“害群之马”有关。尽管自20世纪80年代以来，研究一直在瓦解这种“豪斯霍费尔主义”，但迄今为止，豪斯霍费尔在慕尼黑所处的学术地理环境尚未得到研究。本条试图填补这一空白。通过这样做，它旨在增强我们对地理、地缘政治和纳粹统治之间关系的理解。通过传记分析，我们调查了慕尼黑路德维希·马克西米利安大学（LMU）三位关键地理学者的工作：两位连续担任地理学主席的人（Erich von Drygalski[1906–1935]和Fritz Machatschek[1935–1946]）和豪斯霍费尔最亲密的学术弟子（Gustav Fochler Hauke）。在档案研究的基础上，辅以对这些地理学家著作的分析，我们重点关注1）LMU地理和地缘政治思想发展之间的关系，以及2）福克勒·豪克和马查切克与纳粹统治的纠缠。我们的分析表明，地理和地缘政治思想密不可分。尽管许多研究都集中在（Haushofer和）地缘政治的发展上，但地理学家越来越多地转变为Kämpfende Wissenschaftler（战斗学者）却被忽视了。这种实用的地理政治取向旨在维持和支持扩张性的国家社会主义项目，是纳粹时期LMU学科发展的特点。
{"title":"Beyond Haushoferism: Geography, Geopolitics and National Socialist Rule at Munich’s Ludwig Maximilian University","authors":"Gerhard Rainer, Simon Dudek","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2094773","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2094773","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT For decades, German geographers’ entanglement with Nazi rule has been described as primarily related to geopolitics and, more specifically, to the figure of Karl Haushofer – the ‘black sheep’ of an otherwise ‘scientific’ discipline. While research has been dismantling this ‘Haushoferism’ since the 1980s, the academic geography environment in which Haushofer was embedded in Munich has not been studied thus far. The present article seeks to fill this lacuna. In doing so, it aims to enhance our understanding of the relationship between geography, geopolitics, and Nazi rule. Through a biographical analysis, we investigate the work of three key geography scholars at Munich’s Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU): the two consecutive chairholders in geography (Erich von Drygalski [1906–1935] and Fritz Machatschek [1935–1946]) and Haushofer’s closest academic disciple (Gustav Fochler-Hauke). Building on archival research, complemented by an analysis of these geographers’ writings, we focus on 1) the relationship between geographical and geopolitical thought development at LMU and 2) the entanglement of Fochler-Hauke and Machatschek with Nazi rule. Our analysis shows that geographical and geopolitical thought were inextricably linked. Whereas much research has focused on (Haushofer and) the development of geopolitics, geographers’ increasing transformation into Kämpfende Wissenschaftler [fighting scholars] has been neglected. This applied, practical-political orientation of geography, which aimed to sustain and support the expansionary National Socialist project, characterised the development of the discipline at LMU during the Nazi period.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"1967 - 1989"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42889599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-24DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2089563
Han Cheng, Weidong Liu
ABSTRACT Over the past 5–10 years, a growing number of Chinese scholars and policy experts have sought to theorise the ‘development’ of other peoples and places in the Global South. These intellectual efforts include building temporal frameworks for describing development processes, and often, an implicit set of directives for effecting positive change. Drawing on eight months’ fieldwork in Beijing, this paper examines the representational practices of depicting development and its temporal dimension that have been mobilised in the ongoing production of Chinese international development thinking. In particular, it is concerned with the ways in which temporal distance and proximity have been constructed to provide a theoretical and moral justification for China’s intensifying geopolitical and economic preoccupations. We argue that more than a system of explanations, current Chinese thinking contains and expresses a recalibrated will to geopolitical power, which has had a conditioning effect on the enframing of the meanings and relations of development.
{"title":"Temporality and the Geopolitical Enframing of Chinese International Development Thinking","authors":"Han Cheng, Weidong Liu","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2089563","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2089563","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Over the past 5–10 years, a growing number of Chinese scholars and policy experts have sought to theorise the ‘development’ of other peoples and places in the Global South. These intellectual efforts include building temporal frameworks for describing development processes, and often, an implicit set of directives for effecting positive change. Drawing on eight months’ fieldwork in Beijing, this paper examines the representational practices of depicting development and its temporal dimension that have been mobilised in the ongoing production of Chinese international development thinking. In particular, it is concerned with the ways in which temporal distance and proximity have been constructed to provide a theoretical and moral justification for China’s intensifying geopolitical and economic preoccupations. We argue that more than a system of explanations, current Chinese thinking contains and expresses a recalibrated will to geopolitical power, which has had a conditioning effect on the enframing of the meanings and relations of development.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"1942 - 1966"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42175559","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-20DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2088363
J. Jongerden
ABSTRACT The idea of self-determination through independent state formation served as a crucial political principle for groups and organisations resisting colonial domination and the capitalist world system during the post-World War II era. Kurdish political movements and parties were no exception. They embraced the idea that, as a nation, they were entitled to a state that exercised exclusive territorial control. One of these parties was the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which emerged in the context of Turkey’s Kurdish issue and developed into one of the most important political actors in Kurdistan of the last 40 years. In the 2000s, the PKK started to question whether or not self-determination ought to be conceptualised and practiced through state construction. As a result, self-determination became redefined in terms of societal self-organisation, an idea beyond that of the centralised nation-state. This article shows how the PKK has shifted the concept of self-determination away from the idea of the state and towards the self-organising and self-administering capabilities of all people. This queering of self-determination has enabled a radically new understanding of resistance: the building of a post-capitalist, post-state, and post-patriarchal society.
{"title":"Reverse Discourse, Queering of Self-Determination, and Sexual Ruptures: Abdullah Öcalan, the Kurdistan Workers Party, and the Problem of the Nation-State","authors":"J. Jongerden","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2088363","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2088363","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The idea of self-determination through independent state formation served as a crucial political principle for groups and organisations resisting colonial domination and the capitalist world system during the post-World War II era. Kurdish political movements and parties were no exception. They embraced the idea that, as a nation, they were entitled to a state that exercised exclusive territorial control. One of these parties was the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which emerged in the context of Turkey’s Kurdish issue and developed into one of the most important political actors in Kurdistan of the last 40 years. In the 2000s, the PKK started to question whether or not self-determination ought to be conceptualised and practiced through state construction. As a result, self-determination became redefined in terms of societal self-organisation, an idea beyond that of the centralised nation-state. This article shows how the PKK has shifted the concept of self-determination away from the idea of the state and towards the self-organising and self-administering capabilities of all people. This queering of self-determination has enabled a radically new understanding of resistance: the building of a post-capitalist, post-state, and post-patriarchal society.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"1920 - 1941"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48907338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-06DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2081550
Zeynep Sahin Mencutek
ABSTRACT Despite growing interest in the return of rejected asylum seekers, irregular migrants, and refugees, we do not know enough about how geopolitics affects returns governance. This article addresses this knowledge gap by analysing the case of Turkey, exploring how positions in the global migration regime and relations with countries of origin influence return policies. It first argues that Turkey’s geopolitical reasoning has led it to design an asylum regime, including repatriation and deportation procedures, centred on temporariness. Second, it contends that Turkey’s extraterritorial space-making strategies – namely, military intervention in Syria and humanitarian/development projects in Afghanistan – guide return policies. Examining the Turkish case contributes to our understanding of national returns governance in transit-turned-host countries, which increasingly emphasise repatriation over long-term protection. Finally, the paper contributes more generally to our understanding of the geopolitics of returns by focusing on specific mechanisms that link geopolitical concerns with policy instruments at the state level.
{"title":"The Geopolitics of Returns: Geopolitical Reasoning and Space-Making in Turkey’s Repatriation Regime","authors":"Zeynep Sahin Mencutek","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2081550","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2081550","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite growing interest in the return of rejected asylum seekers, irregular migrants, and refugees, we do not know enough about how geopolitics affects returns governance. This article addresses this knowledge gap by analysing the case of Turkey, exploring how positions in the global migration regime and relations with countries of origin influence return policies. It first argues that Turkey’s geopolitical reasoning has led it to design an asylum regime, including repatriation and deportation procedures, centred on temporariness. Second, it contends that Turkey’s extraterritorial space-making strategies – namely, military intervention in Syria and humanitarian/development projects in Afghanistan – guide return policies. Examining the Turkish case contributes to our understanding of national returns governance in transit-turned-host countries, which increasingly emphasise repatriation over long-term protection. Finally, the paper contributes more generally to our understanding of the geopolitics of returns by focusing on specific mechanisms that link geopolitical concerns with policy instruments at the state level.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"1079 - 1105"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46031570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-06DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2078708
Nitin Arya
ABSTRACT This article critically describes and compares intraregional geopolitical imaginaries as they appear in the official discourses of two groups of states in EUrope: Soft Eurosceptic discourse of Hungary and Poland vs. Europhile discourse of France and Germany. The analysis is carried out through application of pragmatic analysis and language games analysis of official speeches of the leading politicians of these states delivered in the year 2018 on the theme of ‘Future of Europe’. The theoretical framework of Rule-oriented Constructivism and the analytical framework of Critical Geopolitics guide this research. This research complements existing literature on geopolitical imaginaries highlighting the importance of linguistic practices, spatial understandings and intersubjective spaces in EUropean integration.
{"title":"Intraregional Geopolitical Imaginaries in Europe: Hungary and Poland Vs. France and Germany","authors":"Nitin Arya","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2078708","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2078708","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article critically describes and compares intraregional geopolitical imaginaries as they appear in the official discourses of two groups of states in EUrope: Soft Eurosceptic discourse of Hungary and Poland vs. Europhile discourse of France and Germany. The analysis is carried out through application of pragmatic analysis and language games analysis of official speeches of the leading politicians of these states delivered in the year 2018 on the theme of ‘Future of Europe’. The theoretical framework of Rule-oriented Constructivism and the analytical framework of Critical Geopolitics guide this research. This research complements existing literature on geopolitical imaginaries highlighting the importance of linguistic practices, spatial understandings and intersubjective spaces in EUropean integration.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"1807 - 1842"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41319963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-04DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2078705
J. Miggelbrink, F. Meyer
ABSTRACT More than 25 years after Dayton Peace Accords (DPA), the shadows of the Yugoslav and of the subsequent construction of independent states based on ethnic division still looms over Bosnia & Hercegovina (BiH), its population, and the everyday life of people. The construction of its two major political entities – the Federation of Bosnia & Hercegovina (FBiH) and the Republika Srpska (RS) – is reflected in the health care system where it unfolds highly detrimental effects. Here, we can witness the severe impact on BiH’s ability to establish an effective system for organ donation and transplantation. Based on a series of 26 interviews with patients, patients’ organisations, clinicians and politicians BiH and its neighbours, the article identifies obstacles in clinical practices, post-Dayton bureaucracy as well as mistrust and corruption as major themes articulated by our respondents, ultimately imprisoning them in a Post-Dayton paralysis. Desperation amid the deadlocked structural conditions and contemplating alternatives ways of getting access to transplantation seem logical outcomes of a system widely regarded as deficient. This exemplifies the prosaic legacies of wars and the fragile state of BiH’s politico-administrative system.
{"title":"Geopolitics, Paralysis and Health Policy: On the Implications of the Dayton Peace Accords for Bosnia & Herzegovina’s Transplantation System","authors":"J. Miggelbrink, F. Meyer","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2078705","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2078705","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT More than 25 years after Dayton Peace Accords (DPA), the shadows of the Yugoslav and of the subsequent construction of independent states based on ethnic division still looms over Bosnia & Hercegovina (BiH), its population, and the everyday life of people. The construction of its two major political entities – the Federation of Bosnia & Hercegovina (FBiH) and the Republika Srpska (RS) – is reflected in the health care system where it unfolds highly detrimental effects. Here, we can witness the severe impact on BiH’s ability to establish an effective system for organ donation and transplantation. Based on a series of 26 interviews with patients, patients’ organisations, clinicians and politicians BiH and its neighbours, the article identifies obstacles in clinical practices, post-Dayton bureaucracy as well as mistrust and corruption as major themes articulated by our respondents, ultimately imprisoning them in a Post-Dayton paralysis. Desperation amid the deadlocked structural conditions and contemplating alternatives ways of getting access to transplantation seem logical outcomes of a system widely regarded as deficient. This exemplifies the prosaic legacies of wars and the fragile state of BiH’s politico-administrative system.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"1562 - 1588"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47222943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-04DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2084385
L. I. Oztig, M. Okur
ABSTRACT There is a plethora of research on border disputes, border dispute resolution, unsettled borders, and artificially drawn borders. Yet, no study has so far been conducted on the comparative analysis of borders settled with mandatory powers and between nation-states. This article fills this research lacuna and makes a novel contribution to border scholarship by exploring the linkages between border settlement dynamics and the border status quo. In analysing and comparing Turkey’s borders drawn between the 1920s and the 1930s, it is shown that Turkey’s Iraqi and Syrian borders settled with mandatory powers (Britain and France respectively) have resulted in the emergence of alternative border imaginations by one of the neighbouring states, albeit without reaching the level of an official demand to change the status quo. Since its independence, Syria has produced an alternative border imagination with respect to its Turkish border by showing Turkey’s Hatay province within its borders in its official maps and documents. Since the cession of Mosul to Iraq, Turkey’s alternative border imagination has taken the form of state actors’ contemplations about resettling the border. In sharp contrast, the Turkish-Iranian border, settled after long consultations between two independent nation-states, effectively resolved boundary-related problems, resulting in the mutual endorsement of the border status-quo. This article concludes that border settlement processes create path-dependent effects that are carried over to subsequent generations of state actors.
{"title":"Border Settlement Dynamics and Border Status Quo: A Comparative Analysis of Turkey’s Borders","authors":"L. I. Oztig, M. Okur","doi":"10.1080/14650045.2022.2084385","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2084385","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There is a plethora of research on border disputes, border dispute resolution, unsettled borders, and artificially drawn borders. Yet, no study has so far been conducted on the comparative analysis of borders settled with mandatory powers and between nation-states. This article fills this research lacuna and makes a novel contribution to border scholarship by exploring the linkages between border settlement dynamics and the border status quo. In analysing and comparing Turkey’s borders drawn between the 1920s and the 1930s, it is shown that Turkey’s Iraqi and Syrian borders settled with mandatory powers (Britain and France respectively) have resulted in the emergence of alternative border imaginations by one of the neighbouring states, albeit without reaching the level of an official demand to change the status quo. Since its independence, Syria has produced an alternative border imagination with respect to its Turkish border by showing Turkey’s Hatay province within its borders in its official maps and documents. Since the cession of Mosul to Iraq, Turkey’s alternative border imagination has taken the form of state actors’ contemplations about resettling the border. In sharp contrast, the Turkish-Iranian border, settled after long consultations between two independent nation-states, effectively resolved boundary-related problems, resulting in the mutual endorsement of the border status-quo. This article concludes that border settlement processes create path-dependent effects that are carried over to subsequent generations of state actors.","PeriodicalId":47839,"journal":{"name":"Geopolitics","volume":"28 1","pages":"1892 - 1919"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46106188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：