The Impact of democratization: a preliminary investigation on social policies and political violence in Latin America

The recent strides of democracy in Latin America have been associated to conflicting outcomes. The expectation that democracy would bring about peace and prosperity have been only partly satisfied. While political violence has been by and large eradicated from the sub-continent, poverty and social injustice still prevail and hold sway. Our study argues that democracy matters for inequality through the growing strength of center left and left parties and by making political leaders in general more responsive to the underprivileged. Furthermore, although the pension reforms recently enacted in the region generated overall regressive outcomes on income distribution, democratic countries still benefit from their political past: where democratic tradition was stronger, such outcomes have been milder. Democratic tradition and the specific ideological connotations of the parties in power, on the other hand, did not play an equally crucial role in securing lower levels of political violence: during the last wave of democratizations in Latin America, domestic peace was rather an outcome of political and social concessions to those in distress. In sum, together with other factors and especially economic ones, the reason why recent democratizations have provided domestic peace in most cases, but have been unable so far to solve the problem of poverty and inequality, is that democratic traditions in the subcontinent have been relatively weak and, more specifically, that this weakness has undermined the growth of left and progressive parties, acting as an obstacle to redistribution. Such weakness, on the other hand, has not prevented the drastic reduction of domestic political violence, since what mattered in this case was a combination of symbolic or material concessions and political agreements among powerful élites and counter-élites.

Hezbollah's identities and their relevance for cultural and religious IR

This working paper analyses the role of religious and resistance identities in Hezbollah’s transformation and foreign relations. It argues that this Islamist movement has privileged material concerns over the religious dogma when both factors have not been coincidental. To do so, it uses a theoretical framework that presents the main characteristics of the anthropological and political interpretations of the role of culture and religion in defining the behaviour of international actors. In the chapter dedicated to Hezbollah, close attention is paid to the domestic and regional levels of analysis. When assessing Hezbollah’s religious identity, this paper argues that the salience of the pan-Islamic religious identity in Hezbollah’s origins has been replaced by an increased political pragmatism. It also argues that the fight against Israel represents Hezbollah’s raison d’être and that its resistance identity has not suffered major transformations and has been easily combined with religious rhetoric. Linking Hezbollah’s case study with the theoretical framework, this paper argues that political conceptions of cultural and religious identities provide the best analytical tool to understand the evolution of this Islamist movement.

Incorporant els actors i el conflicte violent a la literatura sobre la migració forçosa: un model de la decisió de retornar

El desplaçament de poblacions a causa de conflictes violents s’ha convertit en una de les principals preocupacions humanitàries de les últimes dècades. També s’ha convertit en un assumpte polític de gran rellevància, que és percebut com un llast (en termes econòmics i de seguretat), però també com a peça important en la transició cap a un intervencionisme més gran en el sistema internacional, tant des d’una base humanitària com de seguretat. La importància d’aquests aspectes ha desviat l’atenció de l’anàlisi de les interaccions entre els processos de desplaçament i els conflictes violents que els provoquen. La literatura sobre els conflictes violents ha obviat aquestes interaccions, degut principalment a que els processos de desplaçament són considerats com meres reaccions definides per condicions estructurals. Aquest article parteix de la premissa que l’individu reté la seva capacitat decisiva en aquests processos i que es tracta d’una capacitat que té conseqüències. Per tant, és necessari introduir en l’anàlisi una perspectiva a nivell micro. Partint d’aquesta premissa, el text presenta un model de la decisió de retorn a nivell individual i també a nivell agregat. A més, permet identificar interconnexions fonamentals d’aquestes dinàmiques amb els conflictes violents. Finalment, l’article ofereix algunes conclusions rellevants per al cas de Bòsnia-Herzegovina i sobre les implicacions de la politització del retorn.

A critical application of securitization theory: overcoming the normative dilemma of writing security

This article addresses the normative dilemma located within the application of `securitization,’ as a method of understanding the social construction of threats and security policies. Securitization as a theoretical and practical undertaking is being increasingly used by scholars and practitioners. This scholarly endeavour wishes to provide those wishing to engage with securitization with an alternative application of this theory; one which is sensitive to and self-reflective of the possible normative consequences of its employment. This article argues that discussing and analyzing securitization processes have normative implications, which is understood here to be the negative securitization of a referent. The negative securitization of a referent is asserted to be carried out through the unchallenged analysis of securitization processes which have emerged through relations of exclusion and power. It then offers a critical understanding and application of securitization studies as a way of overcoming the identified normative dilemma. First, it examines how the Copenhagen School’s formation of securitization theory gives rise to a normative dilemma, which is situated in the performative and symbolic power of security as a political invocation and theoretical concept. Second, it evaluates previous attempts to overcome the normative dilemma of securitization studies, outlining the obstacles that each individual proposal faces. Third, this article argues that the normative dilemma of applying securitization can be avoided by firstly, deconstructing the institutional power of security actors and dominant security subjectivities and secondly, by addressing countering or alternative approaches to security and incorporating different security subjectivities. Examples of the securitization of international terrorism and immigration are prominent throughout.