Securitization theory (ST) makes an insightful and significant contribution to security studies. Through the use of discursive speech act, ST provides an innovative strategy for understanding the application of security's distinctive character and dynamics to any issue in order to make it a security issue. Valuable as the theory is to security studies, the subaltern appear missing in existing securitization analyses. Even when the subaltern are examined, for instance in critiques of classical ST, they are conceived and presented as passive, lacking agency, voice, and power, and suffering from security silence problem. ST's reliance on discursive speech act and focus on state political elite prevent it from capturing the subaltern and subaltern securitization process. Furthermore, while existing ST and critiques of securitization studies offer some direction regarding how the subaltern actors may securitize threats to their security, these perspectives are incidental and grossly underdeveloped. In order to resolve this problem, the current study takes a novel approach to securitization studies by investigating how subaltern actors engage in securitizing discourses and practices. By combining the Fanonian decolonial theory of emancipatory violence, where the nature of the (post)colonial context becomes visible with the theoretical insights of ST, the study shows that the subaltern are able to securitize using protest and violence. The subaltern use protest and violence to show their perception and identification of security threats, mobilize the subaltern audience, and challenge and confront the threatening subject – often times, the subaltern's significant audience – to ensure that action is taken on issues concerning subaltern security. In addition to discourse, therefore, protest and violence serve as the subaltern's instruments of political communication used by the subaltern to move issues beyond normal to the point of extraordinary politics. Consequently, protest and violence can force audiences – including the common people and the political elite – to imagine threats to subaltern security, typically perceived but sometimes real, and accept subaltern securitization moves, and where possible take actions that may amount to an alteration or a change in the order of things. Such change may either be in favour of subaltern's perception of security or not. To uncover the essential dynamics of subaltern securitization, this study synthesizes a version of decolonial theory with elements of existing ST and focuses on the subaltern actors from below the state in Nigeria, a non-Western, postcolonial context. The results reveal that subaltern securitization is possible when members of the subaltern successfully mobilize themselves to collectively identify (real or perceived) threat to their security and in so doing challenging and confronting the threat. This makes their security concerns an issue of priority. The study concludes that desirable as subaltern securitization may be, especially to the subaltern, there is a tendency for subaltern securitization to obfuscate the danger that may lurk around subaltern's attempts to securitize certain issues.
Does the occurrence of flood disaster increase the risk of communal conflict and if so, does trust in state political institutions mitigate the adverse effect? This study addresses these questions by studying the intervening effect of trust in local governmental institutions at a sub-national level. The effect of flood disasters on the risk of communal violence is expected to be contingent on peoples' trust that local political structures are able to address potential disputes between groups. Violent conflicts, in that sense, are neither inevitable nor directly determined by the occurrence of disasters. They largely depend on the context of a given society and political response to these external shocks. To test this expectation, the study uses survey data on trust in local state institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa from the Afrobarometer (2005–2018), combined with geo-referenced communal conflict and flood data. In line with theoretical expectations, results suggest that flood disasters are associated with communal violence only for administrative districts that are governed by distrusted local state institutions. Conversely, flood disasters tend to be negatively associated with the risk of communal clashes in the presence of highly trusted local government councils and (especially) trusted judicial courts. Changing model specifications and estimation techniques produces similar results. An out-of-sample cross-validation also shows that accounting for political variables, in addition to flood disasters, improves the predictive performance of the model.
Palestiinalaispakolaiset ovat eläneet pakolaisleireillä jo seitsemän vuosikymmentä. Heidän pakolaisuutensa juontuu vuodesta 1948, jolloin Israelin valtion perustamisen yhteydessä enemmistö alueen palestiinalaisesta väestöstä joutui pakenemaan kotiseuduiltaan. Vuosikymmenten aikana pakolaisleirit ovat tulleet osaksi Lähi-idän maisemaa, ja niillä on kasvanut ja elänyt jo useita palestiinalaissukupolvia. Leirien pitkästä historiasta huolimatta niitä on kuitenkin pidetty väliaikaisina; määritelmällisesti leiri on aina olemassa vain rajatun ajanjakson ja palestiinalaisten kansallisissa narratiiveissa, jotka painottavat paluuta Palestiinaan, niitä ei ole ajateltu pysyvinä asuinpaikkoina. Käytännössä leirit kuitenkin muodostavat olosuhteet, joissa palestiinalaispakolaiset elävät arkeaan ja rakentavat tulevaisuuttaan. Pitkän historiansa, ainutlaatuisen institutionaalisen viitekehyksen sekä palestiinalaisten poliittiseen kamppailuun linkittyvien merkitysten takia leirit luovat omanlaisensa puitteet niillä asuvien pakolaisten elämälle. Tässä tutkimuksessa en silti tarkastele vain leirejä itsessään vaan lähestyn niiden kautta sitä, miten niillä asuvat palestiinalaiset neuvottelevat tulevaisuudentoiveitaan. Tämä etnografiaan pohjaava tutkimus on toteutettu Libanonissa, Jordaniassa ja Länsirannalla usealla eri pakolaisleirillä. Valitsin monikenttäisen lähestymistavan sillä lähtöoletuksella, että pakolaisuuden konteksti vaikuttaa merkittävästi siihen, miten tulevaisuuksia kuvitellaan. Palestiinalaispakolaisten asemamassa onkin merkittäviä eroja näillä kolmella alueella: Libanonissa he elävät ilman kansalaisuutta ja sen tuomia oikeuksia, Jordaniassa enemmistö pakolaisista on samanaikaisesti sekä maan kansalaisia että pakolaisia ja Länsirannalla palestiinalaispakolaiset joutuvat muiden länsirantalaisten tavoin kohtaamaan Israelin väkivaltaisen miehityspolitiikan. Näiden kontekstuaalisten erojen ja niiden vaikutusten ymmärtäminen on ollut tutkimuksen keskiössä. Tutkimuksen lähtöoletuksena on lisäksi ontologisen hermeneutiikan mukaisesti se, että tulevaisuuden tarkastelu ei ole mahdollista ilman, että ymmärtää menneen, nykyisyyden ja näiden välisen suhteen. Tästä syystä käyn läpi eri kentillä asuvien palestiinalaisten historiaa ja etenen leirien nykyolosuhteiden tarkasteluun. Nämä ajallisuudet luovat pohjan pakolaisten tulevaisuudentoiveiden ymmärtämiselle. Palestiinalaispakolaisten historia on täynnä väkivaltaa, pakenemista ja jatkuvaa epävarmuutta, ja pakolaisleirit ovat tilana tiivistäneet pakolaisuuteen liittyvät vaikeudet niin historiallisesti kuin nykyäänkin. Materiaaliset olosuhteet, ahtaus, suhde ympäröivään paikkaan ja yhteisöön sekä leirin identiteetilliset ja poliittiset konnotaatiot ovat kaikki vaikuttaneet siihen, miten tähän tutkimukseen osallistuneet palestiinalaispakolaiset kokivat elinolosuhteensa. Leirien ei koettu pystyvän tarjoamaan toivottua elintasoa, mutta samanaikaisesti ne muodostivat merkityksellisen yhteisön, johon liitettiin useita positiivisia ominaisuuksia. Leirit muodostivat myös osan pakolaisten poliittista identiteettiä: ne muistuttivat niillä asuvien pakolaisuudesta ja muodostivat linkin Palestiinaan ja siten ylläpitivät vaatimusta paluuoikeudesta. Kuitenkin, näistä positiivisista puolista huolimatta, elettyinä tiloina leirit eivät pystyneet luomaan toivottuja puitteita arjelle. Tässä tutkimuksessa painottuu myös se, että Libanonissa, Jordaniassa ja Länsirannalla tarjolla olleet mahdollisuudet eivät useinkaan riittäneet toivotun tulevaisuuden saavuttamiseen. Maastamuutto olikin monelle tapa kuvitella parempaa tulevaisuutta niin itselle kuin perheelle, erityisesti Libanonissa ja Länsirannalla. Parempaa tulevaisuutta neuvoteltiin useita eri reittejä, ja tässä tutkimuksessa keskityn erityisesti koulutuksen, työn ja naimisiinmenon tarjoamiin mahdollisuuksiin. Vaikka myös kansalliset tulevaisuudet, Palestiina ja paluuoikeuden toteutuminen nousivat esiin näissä neuvotteluissa, ilmenivät ne kuitenkin abstraktimmalla tasolla ja eri aikajanalla, kuin tulevaisuudet, joilla haettiin parempia mahdollisuuksia saavuttaa henkilökohtaiset elämäntavoitteet ja helpotusta arjessa kohdattuihin vaikeuksiin. Palestiinalaispakolaisten tulevaisuuskäsitysten erityisyys on juuri henkilökohtaisen ja kansallisen tulevaisuuden välille muodostuvassa ristivedossa. Kansallisen narratiivin mukaan pakolaisten (erityisesti leireillä asuvien) oletetaan sisukkaasti odottavan paluuta, kestävän pakolaisuuden haasteet ja taistelevan kansallisten tavoitteiden puolesta. Samanaikaisesti pakolaiset kuitenkin pyrkivät parantamaan arkeaan, elinolosuhteitaan ja mahdollisuuksiaan tarjolla olevin keinoin. Etnografiassani painottui erityisesti tämä henkilökohtainen puoli ja se, että kansallisten tavoitteiden saavuttamisen ei koettu pystyvän tarjoamaan parannusta pakolaisuuden historian muovaamiin nykyolosuhteisiin riittävän nopealla aikataululla. Väitänkin, että henkilökohtaisten tulevaisuuksien ensisijaisuus heijastaa leireillä asuvien palestiinalaisten kohtaamia vaikeuksia: heidän asemansa ja tulevaisuutensa ei ole tarpeeksi turvattu, jotta he voisivat odottaa ja keskittyä kansallisten tavoitteiden ajamiseen. Sen sijaan palestiinalaispakolaiset ovat pakotettuja tarttumaan tällä hetkellä tarjolla oleviin vaihtoehtoihin ja pyrkimään niihin suuntiin, joissa mahdollisuudet parempaan elämään ovat tarjolla. ; Palestinian refugee camps have been housing Palestinians for seven decades. They were formed after 1948, when in the process of establishing Israel as a Jewish state the majority of Palestinians living in Mandatory Palestine were dispossessed. Over these decades, the camps have become a durable part of the Middle Eastern landscape, and several generations of refugees have already been born, and are living, in them. Despite the fact that Palestinian camps have also been framed as temporary, not only by definition but also in the national narratives stressing the right to return to Palestine, in practice the camps have become sites where lives are lived and futures built. Due to their long history, unique institutional framework, and strong connotation as centers of Palestinian political struggle, Palestinian refugee camps have their own specificities that affect how they frame the life of their dwellers. Yet, this dissertation is not an ethnography of the camps per se; the aim is rather to look through them in order to explore the manifold futures that are negotiated by the Palestinian refugees dwelling in them, and especially by those just reaching adulthood. This ethnographic study has been conducted in several refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, and the West Bank. A multi-sited approach was adopted with the presumption that the context of refugeeness affects the ways in which futures are imagined. Palestinian refugees have been positioned differently in these places: as stateless and excluded in Lebanon, as refugee-citizens in Jordan, and as being among their own people yet enduring the difficulties of the oppressive Israeli occupation in the West Bank. Understanding these contextual specificities in the different host sovereigns has hence been central to the aims of this work. In this dissertation I argue, in line with ontological hermeneutics, that it is not possible to explore the future without first addressing the differing pasts and present conditions of the refugees. Therefore, to understand these differing experiences of Palestinian refugees living under the three host sovereigns, I start by looking at the histories that form the present realities through which Palestinians look to, have hopes for, and plan for their futures. The histories of Palestinian refugeeness have witnessed violence, multiple displacements, and enduring uncertainty. In all the fields that were included in this research it was the camp that embodied the difficulties of being a refugee. The material living conditions, crowdedness, camp community, and relations with the surrounding area and society, as well as the identificational and political connotations, have all affected how the camps have been experienced as places of dwelling by my interlocutors. In many ways they were considered inadequate in terms of providing the hoped-for standards of living, yet simultaneously they formed a significant community that was viewed from a positive perspective, though more so in the West Bank and Jordan than in Lebanon. Nevertheless, while the camps functioned as a marker of Palestinian refugeeness, and were even equated with Palestine and the right of return, as everyday spatialities they left much to be desired. Similarly, this research shows that the possibilities available to the refugees under the host sovereigns were not usually enough for my interlocutors to achieve their aspirations. Hence many – especially in Lebanon and the West Bank, though for different reasons – have come to consider that emigration could fulfil their hopes and provide better conditions for them and their families. Better futures were negotiated via different routes – education, employment, and marriage being the ones explored here. While both return and the national future of Palestine also emerged in these negotiations, they were situated in a different, more abstract timeframe, not one that could provide better possibilities or enhancements in the deprived conditions faced in everyday life. The specificity of Palestinian refugees' negotiations on the future nevertheless emerges from this discrepancy between the national and the personal. On the level of national discourse, Palestinian refugees (especially those living in camps) are people steadfastly waiting for the return, enduring life in the camp and fighting for the national cause. However, on the level of the everyday, they are – as is anyone – aiming to improve their situation with the means available and, as became evident in my ethnography, in the present situation and in light of past experiences those means direct their attention somewhere other than to the political objectives they hold as Palestinian refugees. This, I claim, reflects the difficulties that Palestinian refugees living in the camps face: they are not in a secure enough position to have the luxury of "waiting out" or to concentrate on the political in its national manifestation. Rather, they are forced to negotiate the options at hand, to reach out in those directions where possibilities are available.
