Representation politics of ethnic minorities in Lithuania and Latvia subsumes different minor ethnic groups under one category of minorities' ethnicity. This model of common identity is shaped by juridical and political discourses representing an out-group definition. Differences in everyday cultural practices and social distance among ethnic groups set ethnic boundaries and indicate different strategies of social identity construction for each group. An in-group perspective challenges an image of a common identity and demonstrates its fictive nature.
Representation politics of ethnic minorities in Lithuania and Latvia subsumes different minor ethnic groups under one category of minorities' ethnicity. This model of common identity is shaped by juridical and political discourses representing an out-group definition. Differences in everyday cultural practices and social distance among ethnic groups set ethnic boundaries and indicate different strategies of social identity construction for each group. An in-group perspective challenges an image of a common identity and demonstrates its fictive nature.
Representation politics of ethnic minorities in Lithuania and Latvia subsumes different minor ethnic groups under one category of minorities' ethnicity. This model of common identity is shaped by juridical and political discourses representing an out-group definition. Differences in everyday cultural practices and social distance among ethnic groups set ethnic boundaries and indicate different strategies of social identity construction for each group. An in-group perspective challenges an image of a common identity and demonstrates its fictive nature.
Representation politics of ethnic minorities in Lithuania and Latvia subsumes different minor ethnic groups under one category of minorities' ethnicity. This model of common identity is shaped by juridical and political discourses representing an out-group definition. Differences in everyday cultural practices and social distance among ethnic groups set ethnic boundaries and indicate different strategies of social identity construction for each group. An in-group perspective challenges an image of a common identity and demonstrates its fictive nature.
This article focuses on the evolution of Polish minority responses to Lithuanian minority policies in the post-EU-accession period. State-minority conflicts in Lithuania have not generated violence or minority radicalization, despite continuing discontent among members of the state's Polish minority (which constitutes Lithuania's largest ethnic minority population) and the failure of the Lithuanian state to resolve the causes of discontent. Employing Smooha's concept of ethnic democracy, the article addresses this puzzle through an ethnographic exploration of the views held by members of the Polish minority about the Lithuanian state's policies of nation-building. The findings reveal a diverse set of critical perceptions among Poles in Lithuania, which emphasize the ineffectiveness of state policies in addressing minority needs. However, a shared perception of threat from Russia, generated after the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, helps to sustain the regime's stability and its strategy of stalling the resolution of minority concerns.
This article focuses on the evolution of Polish minority responses to Lithuanian minority policies in the post-EU-accession period. State-minority conflicts in Lithuania have not generated violence or minority radicalization, despite continuing discontent among members of the state's Polish minority (which constitutes Lithuania's largest ethnic minority population) and the failure of the Lithuanian state to resolve the causes of discontent. Employing Smooha's concept of ethnic democracy, the article addresses this puzzle through an ethnographic exploration of the views held by members of the Polish minority about the Lithuanian state's policies of nation-building. The findings reveal a diverse set of critical perceptions among Poles in Lithuania, which emphasize the ineffectiveness of state policies in addressing minority needs. However, a shared perception of threat from Russia, generated after the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, helps to sustain the regime's stability and its strategy of stalling the resolution of minority concerns.
This article focuses on the evolution of Polish minority responses to Lithuanian minority policies in the post-EU-accession period. State-minority conflicts in Lithuania have not generated violence or minority radicalization, despite continuing discontent among members of the state's Polish minority (which constitutes Lithuania's largest ethnic minority population) and the failure of the Lithuanian state to resolve the causes of discontent. Employing Smooha's concept of ethnic democracy, the article addresses this puzzle through an ethnographic exploration of the views held by members of the Polish minority about the Lithuanian state's policies of nation-building. The findings reveal a diverse set of critical perceptions among Poles in Lithuania, which emphasize the ineffectiveness of state policies in addressing minority needs. However, a shared perception of threat from Russia, generated after the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, helps to sustain the regime's stability and its strategy of stalling the resolution of minority concerns.
This article focuses on the evolution of Polish minority responses to Lithuanian minority policies in the post-EU-accession period. State-minority conflicts in Lithuania have not generated violence or minority radicalization, despite continuing discontent among members of the state's Polish minority (which constitutes Lithuania's largest ethnic minority population) and the failure of the Lithuanian state to resolve the causes of discontent. Employing Smooha's concept of ethnic democracy, the article addresses this puzzle through an ethnographic exploration of the views held by members of the Polish minority about the Lithuanian state's policies of nation-building. The findings reveal a diverse set of critical perceptions among Poles in Lithuania, which emphasize the ineffectiveness of state policies in addressing minority needs. However, a shared perception of threat from Russia, generated after the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, helps to sustain the regime's stability and its strategy of stalling the resolution of minority concerns.
The article analyses the impact federalization processes may have on the dynamics of ethnic conflict in multiethnic democratic states. Parting from basic theoretical premises as regards the capacity of federalization principles to manage ethnoterritorial conflicts within multiethnic states, the Belgian and Spanish cases are chosen in order to explain the main theoretical contradiction, whether federative restructuring of a state contributes to reducing ethnic tensions, helps to mitigate divisions and fosters accommodation, or, on the contrary, provides ruling regional elites with relevant resources to fuel further disintegration. Both Belgium and Spain underwent a series of constitutional reforms pursuing the same objective to accommodate ethnic claims; however, while the Spanish solution of autonomous statutes proved to be successful in reducing the risk of state disintegration, the federalization of Belgium seems to have enhanced the cleavage. Among the main factors that contribute to system stabilization and national integration or make secession more likely, the following elements are analysed: constitutional and institutional mechanisms that are applied in specific sociopolitical contexts; type and degree of political autonomy granted to various groups; state-wide and subnational electoral and party systems and their interplay; historical experience of intergroup relations; evolution of ethnoterritorial identities.
The article analyses the impact federalization processes may have on the dynamics of ethnic conflict in multiethnic democratic states. Parting from basic theoretical premises as regards the capacity of federalization principles to manage ethnoterritorial conflicts within multiethnic states, the Belgian and Spanish cases are chosen in order to explain the main theoretical contradiction, whether federative restructuring of a state contributes to reducing ethnic tensions, helps to mitigate divisions and fosters accommodation, or, on the contrary, provides ruling regional elites with relevant resources to fuel further disintegration. Both Belgium and Spain underwent a series of constitutional reforms pursuing the same objective to accommodate ethnic claims; however, while the Spanish solution of autonomous statutes proved to be successful in reducing the risk of state disintegration, the federalization of Belgium seems to have enhanced the cleavage. Among the main factors that contribute to system stabilization and national integration or make secession more likely, the following elements are analysed: constitutional and institutional mechanisms that are applied in specific sociopolitical contexts; type and degree of political autonomy granted to various groups; state-wide and subnational electoral and party systems and their interplay; historical experience of intergroup relations; evolution of ethnoterritorial identities.
The article analyses the impact federalization processes may have on the dynamics of ethnic conflict in multiethnic democratic states. Parting from basic theoretical premises as regards the capacity of federalization principles to manage ethnoterritorial conflicts within multiethnic states, the Belgian and Spanish cases are chosen in order to explain the main theoretical contradiction, whether federative restructuring of a state contributes to reducing ethnic tensions, helps to mitigate divisions and fosters accommodation, or, on the contrary, provides ruling regional elites with relevant resources to fuel further disintegration. Both Belgium and Spain underwent a series of constitutional reforms pursuing the same objective to accommodate ethnic claims; however, while the Spanish solution of autonomous statutes proved to be successful in reducing the risk of state disintegration, the federalization of Belgium seems to have enhanced the cleavage. Among the main factors that contribute to system stabilization and national integration or make secession more likely, the following elements are analysed: constitutional and institutional mechanisms that are applied in specific sociopolitical contexts; type and degree of political autonomy granted to various groups; state-wide and subnational electoral and party systems and their interplay; historical experience of intergroup relations; evolution of ethnoterritorial identities.
This article examines the impact of political cleavages existing in the host state on the receptivity of the political system toward minority claims, its proneness to accommodation and inclusivity toward minority political participation. Applying the theoretical framework of Political Opportunity Structure, the nation-wide political spectrum is regarded an as important element of the structure of political opportunities available to minority communities. By bringing together the cases of Russians in Estonia and Hungarians in Serbia, the article hypothesizes that in post-socialist nation-states, a higher degree of polarization of the political spectrum is more likely to expand the political opportunity structure for ethnic minorities in terms of inclusivity toward minority claims, compared to a political environment characterized by a consensus on the main directions of the country's development. The structure of established political conflicts in Estonia and Serbia are analyzed from the point of view of ethnic minority politics, assessing the effect of nation-wide cleavages on the patterns of cooperation with ethnic minority political forces and concrete impact on minority-related policies.
This article examines the impact of political cleavages existing in the host state on the receptivity of the political system toward minority claims, its proneness to accommodation and inclusivity toward minority political participation. Applying the theoretical framework of Political Opportunity Structure, the nation-wide political spectrum is regarded an as important element of the structure of political opportunities available to minority communities. By bringing together the cases of Russians in Estonia and Hungarians in Serbia, the article hypothesizes that in post-socialist nation-states, a higher degree of polarization of the political spectrum is more likely to expand the political opportunity structure for ethnic minorities in terms of inclusivity toward minority claims, compared to a political environment characterized by a consensus on the main directions of the country's development. The structure of established political conflicts in Estonia and Serbia are analyzed from the point of view of ethnic minority politics, assessing the effect of nation-wide cleavages on the patterns of cooperation with ethnic minority political forces and concrete impact on minority-related policies.
This article examines the impact of political cleavages existing in the host state on the receptivity of the political system toward minority claims, its proneness to accommodation and inclusivity toward minority political participation. Applying the theoretical framework of Political Opportunity Structure, the nation-wide political spectrum is regarded an as important element of the structure of political opportunities available to minority communities. By bringing together the cases of Russians in Estonia and Hungarians in Serbia, the article hypothesizes that in post-socialist nation-states, a higher degree of polarization of the political spectrum is more likely to expand the political opportunity structure for ethnic minorities in terms of inclusivity toward minority claims, compared to a political environment characterized by a consensus on the main directions of the country's development. The structure of established political conflicts in Estonia and Serbia are analyzed from the point of view of ethnic minority politics, assessing the effect of nation-wide cleavages on the patterns of cooperation with ethnic minority political forces and concrete impact on minority-related policies.
The article begins with a discussion of the transitional justice concept, which is followed by a brief overview of the developments of the study field. It notes that the classical works on transitional justice focus on the implementation of various transitional justice policies, their adaptability to specific needs of societies, emerging after a repressive rule or a violent ethnic conflict, and the possible benefits resulting from an active engagement in the past, whereas the more recent inquiries demonstrate an important empirical turn. Since the year 2000, there has been an increase in comparative studies attempting to empirically verify the effect of transitional justice mechanisms on societal transitions. This new wave of research calls into question the previous assumption regarding the ability of transitional justice mechanisms to contribute to peace and reconciliation and demonstrates that this relationship may be more complicated than initially thought. The article continues with the discussion of the main debates in the field. It covers the well-known debates on Peace vs. Justice, Truth vs. Justice, and provides an overview of the problems faced by those attempting to explore the causal relationship among the transitional justice mechanisms and societal reconciliation, democratization and peace. The methodological issues of definitions and problems with proving causality are addressed. The article concludes with recommendations for future inquiries.
