散居、非法化和外交政策:打开巴西对“犹太复国主义就是种族主义”联合国决议的投票

IF 0.3 3区 社会学 Q2 HISTORY Diplomacy & Statecraft Pub Date : 2022-07-03 DOI:10.1080/09592296.2022.2113258
Jonathan Grossman
{"title":"散居、非法化和外交政策:打开巴西对“犹太复国主义就是种族主义”联合国决议的投票","authors":"Jonathan Grossman","doi":"10.1080/09592296.2022.2113258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyses Brazil’s 1975 vote in favour of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379, which equated Zionism with racism and racial discrimination. Historians and political scientists have investigated extensively the causes for this vote. However, all these analyses focus on Brazil’s relations with other state actors whilst ignoring the possibility that domestic factors, including Brazilian leaders’ attitudes towards Zionism, influenced the decision to support the anti-Zionist resolution. Drawing on archival materials from Brazil and Israel, the article introduces domestic and normative factors into the analysis of this controversial vote. It argues that Brazil’s desire to secure oil imports and financial investments from Arab countries, combined with its repudiation of diasporic allegiances, best explain its support for the resolution. Whilst the Brazilian dictatorship’s delegitimisation of diasporic loyalties was not the primary reason for the decision, it constituted an important element in the normative framework that enabled it.","PeriodicalId":44804,"journal":{"name":"Diplomacy & Statecraft","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diaspora, Delegitimisation, and Foreign Policy: Unpacking Brazil’s Vote for the “Zionism is Racism” United Nations Resolution\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Grossman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09592296.2022.2113258\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article analyses Brazil’s 1975 vote in favour of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379, which equated Zionism with racism and racial discrimination. Historians and political scientists have investigated extensively the causes for this vote. However, all these analyses focus on Brazil’s relations with other state actors whilst ignoring the possibility that domestic factors, including Brazilian leaders’ attitudes towards Zionism, influenced the decision to support the anti-Zionist resolution. Drawing on archival materials from Brazil and Israel, the article introduces domestic and normative factors into the analysis of this controversial vote. It argues that Brazil’s desire to secure oil imports and financial investments from Arab countries, combined with its repudiation of diasporic allegiances, best explain its support for the resolution. Whilst the Brazilian dictatorship’s delegitimisation of diasporic loyalties was not the primary reason for the decision, it constituted an important element in the normative framework that enabled it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44804,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diplomacy & Statecraft\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diplomacy & Statecraft\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09592296.2022.2113258\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diplomacy & Statecraft","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09592296.2022.2113258","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要本文分析了巴西1975年对联合国大会第3379号决议的投票,该决议将犹太复国主义等同于种族主义和种族歧视。历史学家和政治学家对这次投票的原因进行了广泛的调查。然而,所有这些分析都集中在巴西与其他国家行为者的关系上,而忽略了国内因素,包括巴西领导人对犹太复国主义的态度,影响了支持反犹太复国主义决议的决定的可能性。本文借鉴巴西和以色列的档案材料,将国内和规范因素引入对这一有争议的投票的分析中。它认为,巴西希望从阿拉伯国家获得石油进口和金融投资,再加上它对流散忠诚的否认,最好地解释了它对该决议的支持。虽然巴西独裁政权剥夺了流散忠诚的合法性并不是做出这一决定的主要原因,但它构成了使其成为可能的规范框架中的一个重要因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Diaspora, Delegitimisation, and Foreign Policy: Unpacking Brazil’s Vote for the “Zionism is Racism” United Nations Resolution
ABSTRACT This article analyses Brazil’s 1975 vote in favour of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379, which equated Zionism with racism and racial discrimination. Historians and political scientists have investigated extensively the causes for this vote. However, all these analyses focus on Brazil’s relations with other state actors whilst ignoring the possibility that domestic factors, including Brazilian leaders’ attitudes towards Zionism, influenced the decision to support the anti-Zionist resolution. Drawing on archival materials from Brazil and Israel, the article introduces domestic and normative factors into the analysis of this controversial vote. It argues that Brazil’s desire to secure oil imports and financial investments from Arab countries, combined with its repudiation of diasporic allegiances, best explain its support for the resolution. Whilst the Brazilian dictatorship’s delegitimisation of diasporic loyalties was not the primary reason for the decision, it constituted an important element in the normative framework that enabled it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊最新文献
“I Have Concluded That the US Government Will Adopt a New Focus in Its Policies Towards the Government of South Africa.” President Jimmy Carter and Apartheid South Africa The ‘US Factor’ in the Satō Administration’s Diplomacy in the Indonesia-Malaysia Conflict, 1964-1966 The 1941 Merano Conference: Building a Relationship Through Military Diplomacy An Indefinite Alliance? Article 13 and the North Atlantic Treaty David Owen, Human Rights, and the Remaking of British Foreign Policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1