Search results

The divided families problem is a serious social issue in North and South Korea, involving hundreds of thousands of first generation divided family members, most of whom have not seen their relatives since the Korean War. It is the most pressing humanitarian issue between the two Koreas, and is connected to the greater issue of human rights in North Korea today. However, little serious academic work exists on the subject, in either English or Korean. This new study, based on research conducted in Korea, including interviews in 2001 with Korean families who benefited from the most recent exchan

Brexit has continued to capture the attention of International Relations (IR) scholars, where it has been linked to the burgeoning debate on race and postcolonialism. This article adds to this scholarship by historicising the question of imperial nostalgia, which has been central to these intersecting literatures. It re-examines how influential theorists Hall and Gilroy linked the peculiarities of British national consciousness to traumas issuing from the loss of great power status. It emphasises two themes often lacking in recent accounts of Brexit nationalism: namely, the centrality of military mobilisation to national consciousness; and the unevenness between popular and elite sentiment with regards to the imperial dimension. In historicising themes of extroversion and introversion, it reconsiders the significant metamorphoses in post-Thatcherite British nationalism, which had centred on proclaiming a national renaissance founded in foreign policy successes, international moral leadership and a state-led consensus for rolling out globalisation worldwide. The research shows that revisionism about the British Empire played a significant role in foreign policy discourse across this period, as did pro-EU sentiment among the governing and ruling elite. It highlights the mechanisms which allowed UK foreign policy intellectuals to link the military roll-out of 'postmodern' social norms with the European project's end goals. These findings help historically situate Brexit amid a succession of crises for the liberal global order. The research finds that, whereas Brexit appeared initially as a retreat or break from the UK's post-Thatcherite 'globalising' nationalism, subsequent developments highlight significant continuities.

AbstractNorth Sea oil discoveries introduced a qualitative divide that gave rise to at least the prospect of an economically viable Scottish independence, insofar as it made the "Scottish economy" a legitimate point of contestation on constitutional lines. In turn, this problematised the nature of minority nationalism in advanced, developed, post‐imperial capitalist regional economies. The research assesses how economic factors – most notably oil – materially affected the prospects of asserting power, and thus the possibilities for imagining collective agency as a national (i.e. Scottish) project. Oil helped shift "New Left" thinking away from assimilationist and modernising projects of assimilating regional consciousness into "national" projects, while also inspiring outright nationalists to define their own project in relation to the earlier phases of nationalism. The study thus contributes to recentring the study of Scotland, with a smaller emphasis on the local dimension and identities, as against the role of national actors in untangling relationships with wider geopolitical and geo‐economic forces. The claim is not simply that global forces formed the qualitative divide that made nationalist action possible; but also that these were conscious considerations of actors in the aftermath of North Sea discoveries.

This research examines the interacting role of processes of state transformation – namely, devolution and Europeanisation – in the development of Scottish nationalism. It draws on the concept of 'member statehood', examining how relationships within nation states have been transformed by the European dynamic. Superficially, Scotland seems to contradict central aspects of this theory: the main citizen mobilising response to Brexit has been in Scotland and aimed precisely at restoring a notional Scottish popular sovereignty by re- joining the EU. However, an analysis of Scottish political development reveals a more complex picture putting state transformation theories in a more sympathetic light. Scottish independence emerges as a complex, contradictory response to post-neoliberalism and the crisis of member-statehood. While Europeanism has proved a useful tool for competing forces in Scotland, it has been refracted through problems of a 'democratic deficit' and claims for the 'restoration' of sovereignty appealing to disenchanted voters.

This report investigates how the UK interprets, narrates and implements its obligations towards international protection for refugees and others that are at significant risk of serious human rights violations and persecution, with an emphasis on the impact of recent migration movements. It explores how the UK applies international protection instruments, particularly the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees/the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and Common European Asylum System (CEAS) directives, and examines the political and policy conflicts that have resulted, most notably with the 2016 "Brexit" referendum on UK membership of the European Union (EU). Highlighting the gaps between policy and the experience of the asylum regime in practice, the report considers the beliefs, coping strategies and perceptions of those who go through the asylum system. It also links experiences and practices to surrounding political narratives, noting how actors in different parts of the asylum system internalise and/or resist the asylum system's rationalisations.

This report investigates how the UK interprets, narrates and implements its obligations towards international protection for refugees and others that are at significant risk of serious human rights violations and persecution, with an emphasis on the impact of recent migration movements. It explores how the UK applies international protection instruments, particularly the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees/the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and Common European Asylum System (CEAS) directives, and examines the political and policy conflicts that have resulted, most notably with the 2016 "Brexit" referendum on UK membership of the European Union (EU). Highlighting the gaps between policy and the experience of the asylum regime in practice, the report considers the beliefs, coping strategies and perceptions of those who go through the asylum system. It also links experiences and practices to surrounding political narratives, noting how actors in different parts of the asylum system internalise and/or resist the asylum system's rationalisations.