950 resultados para ARAB SPRING
Resumo:
When the Arab Spring broke out, the United States was in a quandary over how to handle the crisis in its attempt to balance its moral obligations and ideals without undercutting its strategic interests and those of its close allies. Flaws in US diplomatic approach have contributed to one of the most serious foreign policy crisis for a US administration to date with consequential upheaval and erosion of the US-built balance of power. The reactions and policy responses of the Obama administration highlight the difficulties in grasping with the new reality in the Middle East and in enunciating a policy platform that could combine American interests and values.
Resumo:
This article advances the theoretical integration between securitization theory and the framing approach, resulting in a set of criteria hereby called security framing. It seeks to make a twofold contribution: to sharpen the study of the ideational elements that underlie the construction of threats, and to advance towards a greater assessment of the audience's preferences. The case study under examination is the 2011 military intervention of the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council in Bahrain. The security framing of this case will help illuminate the dynamics at play in one of the most important recent events in Gulf politics.
Resumo:
Almost three years have passed since the 'Arab Spring' began in late 2010. In the major sites of popular uprisings, political conditions remain unsettled or violent. Despite similarities in their original opposition to authoritarian rule, the outcomes differed from country to country. In Tunisia and Egypt, processes of transiting from authoritarian rule produced contrasting consequences for democratic politics. Uprisings led to armed rebellion in Libya and Syria, but whereas Gaddafi was overthrown, Asad was not. What explains the different trajectories and outcomes of the Arab Spring? How were these shaped by the power structure and levels of social control of the pre-uprising regimes and their state institutions, on the one hand, and by the character of the societies and oppositional forces that rose against them? Comparing Tunisia with Egypt, and Libya with Syria, this paper discusses various factors that account for variations in the trajectories and outcomes of the Arab Spring, namely, the legacy of the previous regime, institutional and constitutional choices during "transition" from authoritarian rule, socioeconomic conditions, and the presence of absence of ethnic, sectarian and geographic diversity.
Resumo:
本稿は、中東における問題や紛争に対する日本の政策を考察し、中長期的な視野に立った日本の国益追求のためにはどのような選択肢が考えられるかを論じる。そのために、イランの核開発問題とシリアの市民戦争をケースとしてとりあげる。戦後の日本は中東での問題や紛争に対して、地域内諸国およびアメリカとの関係を同時に維持するために、双方の均衡を図る政策を打ち出してきたが、冷戦後には米国寄りの傾向が多く見られた。現在中東では、アラブの春の展望は不透明な部分が多い。日本は中東との関係において、問題や紛争の性質によっては負の遺産を抱える欧米とは一線を画した独自の政策とアプローチを打ち出すことが、中東資源国との関係の強化と拡大や中東市場の発展と安定には望ましいと考える。また同時に、今後の米国の中東における国益の変化が考えられることも要因ととらえ、本稿は冷戦期にみられたような、より均衡のとれた立場を打ち出し、より広い概念をもとに基づいた効果的なソフトパワーの行使を提唱する。
Resumo:
The Vernacular Discourse of the "Arab Spring" is a project that bridges the divide between the East and the West by offering new readings to Arab subjectivities. Through an analysis of the "Arab Spring" through the lens of vernacular discourse, it challenges the Euro-Americo-centric legacies of Orientalism in Western academia and the new wave of extremism in the Arab world by offering alternative representations of Arab bodies and subjectivities. To offer this new reading of the "Arab Spring," it explores the foundations of critical rhetoric as a theory and a practice and argues for a turn towards a critical vernacular discourse. The turn towards critical vernacular discourse is important as it urges the analyses of different artifacts produced by marginalized groups in order to understand their perspectives that have largely been foreclosed in traditional cultural studies research. Building on embodied/performative critical rhetoric, the vernacular discourses of the Arab revolutionary body examines other forms of knowledge productions that are not merely textual; more specifically, through data gathered in the Lhbib Bourguiba, Tunisia. This analysis of the political revolutionary body unveils the complexity underlining the discussion around issues of identity, agency and representation in the Middle East and North Africa, and calls for a critical study towards these issues in the region beyond the binary approach that has been practiced and applied by academics and media analysts. Hence, by analyzing vernacular discourse, this research locates a method of examining and theorizing the dialectic between agency, citizenry, and subjectivity through the study of how power structure is recreated and challenged through the use of the vernacular in revolutionary movements, as well as how marginalized groups construct their own subjectivities through the use of vernacular discourse. Therefore, highlighting the political prominence of evaluating the Arab Spring as a vernacular discourse is important in creating new ways of understanding communication in postcolonial/neocolonial settings.
Resumo:
This research provides an institutional explanation of the practices of external intervention in the Arab state system from the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1922 to the Arab Spring. My explanation consists of two institutional variables: sovereignty and inter-state borders. I examine the changes in regional and international norms of sovereignty and their impact on the practices of external intervention in the Arab state system. I also examine the impact of the level of institutionalization of inter-state borders in the Arab World on the practices of external intervention. I argue that changes in regional and international norms of sovereignty and changes in the level of institutionalization of inter-state borders have constituted the significant variation over time in both the frequency and type of external intervention in the Arab state system from 1922 to the present. My institutional explanation and findings seriously challenge the traditional accounts of sovereignty and intervention in the Arab World, including the cultural perspectives that emphasize the conflict between sovereignty, Arabism, and Islam, the constructivist accounts that emphasize the regional norm of pan-Arabism, the comparative politics explanations that focus on the domestic material power of the Arab state, the post-colonial perspectives that emphasize the artificiality of the Arab state, and the realist accounts that focus on great powers and the regional distribution of power in the Middle East. This research also contributes to International Relations Theory. I construct a new analytical framework to study the relations between sovereignty, borders, and intervention, combining theoretical elements from the fields of Role Theory, Social Constructivism, and Institutionalization. Methodologically, this research includes both quantitative and qualitative analysis. I conduct content analysis of official documents of Arab states and the Arab League, Arabic press documents, and Arab political thought. I also utilize quantitative data sets on international intervention.
Resumo:
El estudio de Lakoff y Johnson Metáforas de la vida cotidiana (1980) ha dotado al campo de la metáfora de un renovado interés, y a éste siguieron numerosas publicaciones abordándolo desde diversas perspectivas. Lakoff y Johnson (1980) aseguran que la metáfora es, de hecho, una característica del pensamiento y, por consiguiente, ya no es una propiedad exclusiva del lenguaje. La metáfora sería en realidad un reflejo de cómo concebimos e interpretamos el mundo en que vivimos, en la medida en que está conformada por nuestras experiencias corporales, un fenómeno al que Lakoff y Johnson se refieren como la “mente corpórea”. La metáfora cumple la función de “comprender” y facilitar la interpretación de un ámbito o experiencia en los términos de otro ámbito o experiencia (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980: 36). Los conceptos abstractos son difíciles de ser pensados per se; consecuentemente, las personas recurren a la metáfora para concebirlos en los términos de otras nociones más concretas que están, en cierto grado, vinculadas a nuestras experiencias somáticas. Si bien no escasean las investigaciones en el campo de las metáforas, parece haber, sin embargo, cierto vacío en lo tocante a la manifestación de la metáfora en modos distintos del modo verbal. Forceville (2009: 19) afirma que uno de los principios fundamentales de la Teoría de la Metáfora Conceptual es la idea de que el variado empleo de metáforas por parte del ser humano sugiere “que piensa en gran medida metafóricamente”. Esto lleva a la conclusión de que la manifestación de la metáfora debería estar presente en los diversos modos del pensamiento, y no únicamente en el verbal. Estos otros modos de pensamiento incluyen, entre otros, las imágenes, la música, los sonidos y los gestos. Asimismo, la mayoría de estudios que se han realizado en el área de las metáforas multimodales ha sido aplicada al terreno de la publicidad. Los anunciantes parecen advertir el ! 2! poder que se invierte en las metáforas, y las usan profusamente para transmitir mensajes a los consumidores. No obstante, recientemente existe un nuevo interés por investigar el uso de metáforas multimodales en las caricaturas (véase, por ejemplo, El Refaie 2003, 2009; Schilperoord y Maes 2009; Yus 2009; Bergen 2003; Marin Aresse 2008). Las tiras cómicas se distinguen de los anuncios principalmente por el hecho de que las caricaturas transmiten una postura negativa frente a un sujeto particular, mientras que los anuncios presentan una actitud positiva. Igualmente, les diferencia el hecho de que las tiras cómicas requieren un conocimiento social y político específico. El presente escrito examina y compara el uso de metáforas multimodales en caricaturas políticas – tanto inglesas como árabes – que retratan la Primavera Árabe en Egipto, con el fin de determinar: (1) si la mayoría de caricaturas son conceptualmente específicas o culturalmente específicas; (2) los principales dominios fuente empleados por los caricaturistas ingleses y árabes para interpretar la Primavera Árabe; (3) si hay semejanzas o diferencias entre las caricaturas inglesas y las árabes en su elección del dominio meta; y (4) observar también cómo los distintos modos (aquí esencialmente los modos verbal y pictórico) contribuyen a representar la Primavera Árabe. El corpus para este estudio se compone de un total de 50 tiras cómicas, 25 de ellas inglesas y las 25 restantes árabes. En cada una de estas tiras debe haber al menos una metáfora que representa la Primavera Árabe o alguno de sus subtemas. Las tiras han sido seleccionadas aleatoriamente a través de Internet. Para el análisis, la investigadora ha seguido el marco teórico propuesto por Bounegru y Forceville (2011) en cuanto a la determinación de metáforas en general, así como la determinación de metáforas multimodales de tipo verbovisual en particular. Por cada tira cómica se ha llevado a cabo un análisis independiente, determinando el dominio fuente y el dominio meta, las metáforas, las asignaciones, qué se está representando verbalmente y qué se representa pictóricamente. Además, la autora ha analizado ! 3! posteriormente si estas metáforas son culturalmente específicas o no, y/o si están relacionadas con metáforas más genéricas o universales. El análisis que comprende este trabajo se divide en dos secciones. La primera parte es un estudio detallado de los dos corpora, abordando los distintos escenarios de los dominios fuente empleados por los dibujantes según su similitud. Esta sección presenta a su vez un análisis de los diversos modos que se utilizan para revelar el dominio fuente así como el dominio meta. Del mismo modo, se incluyen las metáforas específicas manejadas en cada tira cómica y, cuando se da el caso, aquellas metáforas genéricas o universales a las que remite. La segunda sección del análisis presenta una comparativa entre ambos corpora basada en el análisis expuesto en la primera parte. Además, trata varios de los fenómenos lingüísticos a los que han recurrido frecuentemente los dibujantes ingleses y árabes. Estos fenómenos son principalmente la metonimia y la personificación. Igualmente, en esta sección la autora investiga en mayor profundidad las metáforas usadas por los dibujantes ingleses y los árabes, determinando si son ora conceptualmente específicas, ora culturalmente específicas, a partir del hecho de que las metáforas sirven como herramienta para reconocer la forma en que personas distintas, o bien culturas distintas, interpretan varias cuestiones. Por ejemplo, a la hora de conceptualizar el futuro, algunas culturas lo representan espacialmente como delante del hablante, mientras que otras se refieren al mismo como localizado detrás del sujeto (Lakoff y Johnson 1980: 14). Este trabajo ha permitido varios hallazgos. En cuanto a las metáforas empleadas para representar la Primavera Árabe, tanto las tiras inglesas como las árabes han recurrido a una cierta variedad de metáforas. Algunas de las tiras presentan más de una metáfora operando a la vez. Los dibujantes ingleses y árabes parecen haberse apoyado siempre en el modo pictórico para presentar el dominio fuente, así como en el modo verbal para mostrar el dominio meta. ! 4! Además, respecto a la naturaleza de las metáforas que figuran en sendos corpora, casi todas las metáforas son conceptuales en cuanto que se corresponden con nuestras experiencias corporales; no hay, por otro lado, ninguna metáfora culturalmente específica. Asimismo, la única diferencia a este respecto entre ambos corpora es una variación en lo que constituye el prototipo de una categoría particular – aquí concretamente la categoría “primavera” en cada una de las culturas –. En las tiras inglesas, una flor es empleada para representar la primavera, mientras que en las árabes el elemento natural más frecuente para simbolizar la primavera es un árbol.
Resumo:
From the Introduction. In 2010 the martyring of Mohamed Bouazizi began a ripple of civil uprisings across the Middle East, and would lead to a wave of revolutions that the media would dub the Arab Spring. From North Africa to the Gulf Region, these civil uprisings made major headlines but found little intervention on behalf of world superpowers such as the United States or the European Union. Acting as more of an observer than as an active participant in these revolutions, it would seem that the European Union played a small role in preventing civil unrest, or in aiding in the policing of these oppressive governments. By example of the passive position held by Europe during these revolutions, the EU appears to be ill equipped to handle security issues such as the massive revolutionary chain witnessed across the Mediterranean. Now, however, they have a new opportunity to be involved in a post- Arab Spring Mediterranean. This paper seeks to address some reasons behind the Arab Spring, describe the institutional framework previously and currently in place, as well as to analyze the progress of Europe’s relationship with the Mediterranean by analyzing the EU’s past and current role in the Mediterranean. It will also look at critiques of the EU’s role in the Arab Spring, as well as the opportunities to be taken in the Mediterranean region.
Resumo:
The promotion of women’s rights is described as a priority within the external action of the European Union (EU). As a result of the Arab Spring uprisings which have been ongoing since 2011, democracy and human rights have been pushed to the forefront of European policy towards the Euro-Mediterranean region. The EU could capitalise on these transformations to help positively reshape gender relations or it could fail to adapt. Thus, the Arab Spring can be seen to serve as a litmus test for the EU’s women’s rights policy. This paper examines how and to what extent the EU diffuses women’s rights in this region, by using Ian Manners’ ‘Normative Power Europe’ as the conceptual framework. It argues that while the EU tries to behave as a normative force for women’s empowerment by way of ‘informational diffusion’, ‘transference’ ‘procedural diffusion’ and ‘overt diffusion’; its efforts could, and should, be strengthened. There are reservations over the EU’s credibility, choice of engagement and its commitment in the face of security and ideological concerns. Moreover, it seems that the EU focuses more intently on women’s political rights than on their social and economic freedoms.
Resumo:
The European Union (EU) has traditionally taken a rather nuanced view of the activities of Hezbollah. Despite historic links to violent activity, Europe always remained reluctant to place the Lebanese militant group on its list of terrorist organisations. Internal divergences among member states, as well as the strategic-realist goals of the EU in both Lebanon and the Middle East more generally meant that such a listing never materialised. This remained the case even in the initial turmoil following the Arab uprisings, when Hezbollah’s relatively moderating objectives were viewed as a force for stability. However, the EU shifted policy in July 2013 by listing the military wing of Hezbollah as a terrorist entity. This paper will investigate the reasons behind this decision, as well as the likely implications and effectiveness of the new policy. Two principal catalysts were behind the decision. The first was a Hezbollah-linked bombing in Bulgaria which provided the focal point around which a consensus of the EU member states could emerge in the Council. Secondly, the escalation both of the Syrian conflict and Hezbollah’s role in it provided a more political and strategic impetus for the decision. This paper maintains that although a change in policy was somewhat necessary, it is questionable whether the artificial separation of Hezbollah’s political and military wings and the symbolic proscription of the latter is the most propitious choice to achieve European objectives.
Resumo:
In the wake of the Arab Spring, the Southern Mediterranean region has reached a turning point in its history, presenting many opportunities and challenges for the EU. In this MEDPRO Policy Paper, Rym Ayadi and Carlo Sessa explore various possible scenarios that could play out in EU-Mediterranean relations over the next two decades but find, lamentably, that the EU has set itself on a ‘business as usual’ course, leaving the region open to further polarisation and the involvement of other external players.
Resumo:
The outbreak of the Arab Spring and the unrest, revolution and war that followed during the course of 2011 have forced the EU to acknowledge the need to radically re-think its policy approach towards the Southern Mediterranean, including in the domain of migration. Migration and mobility now feature as key components of High Representative Catherine Ashton’s new framework for cooperation with the region (Partnership for Democracy and Shared Prosperity), while the EU has declared its intention to strengthen its external migration policy by setting up “mutually beneficial” partnerships with third countries – so-called ‘Dialogues for Migration, Mobility and Security’ – now placed at the centre of the EU’s renewed Global Approach to Migration and Mobility (GAMM). However, the success of this approach and its potential to establish genuine cooperative partnerships that will support smooth economic and political transformation in North Africa hinge on the working arrangements and institutional configurations shaping the renewed GAMM at EU level which has long been marked by internal fragmentation, a lack of transparency and a predominance of home affairs and security actors. This paper investigates the development of the Dialogues for Migration, Mobility and Security with the Southern Mediterranean in a post-Lisbon Treaty institutional setting. It asks to what extent has the application of the Lisbon Treaty and the creation of an “EU Foreign Minister” in High Representative Ashton, supported by a European External Action Service (EEAS), remedied or re-invigorated the ideological and institutional struggles around the implementation of the Global Approach? Who are the principal agents shaping and driving the Dialogues for Migration, Mobility and Security? Who goes abroad to speak on the behalf of the EU in these Dialogues and what impact does this have on the effectiveness, legitimacy and accountability of the Dialogues under the renewed GAMM as well as the wider prospects for the Southern Mediterranean?