Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- Part One: Making and Unmaking Village Lives -- 1 Houses in Flames -- 2 Locked Doors -- 3 Halal Exchange -- Part Two: Vital Exchange -- 4 Cosmological Time -- 5 Praying and Witnessing -- 6 Blessing Falling from the Sky -- Afterword: The Sultan Is Back -- Glossary -- Notes -- References -- Index -- Back Cover.

The Good Friday / Belfast Agreement became, with considerable efforts over several years from so many involved, a broadly accepted if never fully stable political framework for Northern Ireland. A year after implementation, the prospect of the Northern Ireland Protocol delivering similar results is diminishing. Instead, there is a risk it entrenches divisions in which all sides believe others, not themselves, must be the ones to compromise most. Such divisions around the Protocol have spread beyond the land and sea borders of Northern Ireland, increasingly overshadowing relationships between the UK and the EU, and the UK and the US. These are not in any of their wider interests. Talk of trade wars in Europe cannot strengthen any economy, while the UK's diplomatic relationships with the US remain strained. Finding unity on huge questions like Russia-Ukraine becomes harder against this backdrop. To varying degrees, all of the parties involved in the Northern Ireland Protocol discussions were involved in reaching the 1998 Agreement that ended the 30-year period known as 'the troubles'. Drawing on the lessons from that time and the arrangements they put in place, there is a need for a new political process, outside of technical discussions on trade matters within the Protocol. A new shared endeavour is needed to resolve what otherwise threatens to be a long and damaging Northern Ireland and Brexit stalemate.

The discourse on tolerance has become axiomatic for political and cultural life in the era of (post-)liberal modernity. In the event of any form of violence, the discourse is invoked as a 'solution' to 'intolerance'. But what if we considered the tolerance discourse itself as an axiom of violence? Its discursive labour creates configurations of power relations that transform the existing human affairs and relations into fixed conditions and categories of difference. Instead of taking tolerance as an analytical proxy, this paper ethnographically elucidates how the tolerance discourse is refused and resisted with the social grammars, practices and ethical vernaculars of care, mercy and solidarity. By focusing on the spaces of public kitchens in postwar Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ethics of immediacy they engender, I explore the actually existing forms of living with difference beyond the threshold of tolerance discourses.

The discourse on tolerance has become axiomatic for political and cultural life in the era of (post-)liberal modernity. In the event of any form of violence, the discourse is invoked as a 'solution' to 'intolerance'. But what if we considered the tolerance discourse itself as an axiom of violence? Its discursive labour creates configurations of power relations that transform the existing human affairs and relations into fixed conditions and categories of difference. Instead of taking tolerance as an analytical proxy, this paper ethnographically elucidates how the tolerance discourse is refused and resisted with the social grammars, practices and ethical vernaculars of care, mercy and solidarity. By focusing on the spaces of public kitchens in postwar Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ethics of immediacy they engender, I explore the actually existing forms of living with difference beyond the threshold of tolerance discourses.

The UK's road to an independent trade policy has reached a critical moment. Within the next six months Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) containing long term arrangements and rules could be finalised with the United States and / or European Union, who between them constitute around 65% of UK trade. Talks have also started with Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. Our updated Trade Policy Readiness Assessment suggests that the UK government is not fully ready for this activity. On a scale where 1 suggests no work being undertaken, 3 a stable position to begin talks, and 5 successful delivery, we find problems in seeking consensus, expanding priorities beyond the traditional tariff reduction, and putting in place a realistic implementation plan.

In leaving the European Union the UK will conduct a fully independent trade policy for the first time since January 1973. This independent trade policy may come into force gradually, with an Implementation Period from March 2019 to December 2020 seeing the UK in a continuing Customs Union with the EU, prior to having full control and the freedom to implement new Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) from January 2021. This paper will assess the UK's readiness to successfully run a fully independent trade policy. In the next section we define a measurement framework based around six pillars we have observed as being crucial to success globally. These are not the specifics of which agreements or policies should be pursued, but rather a set of criteria that reflect whether a country has a sufficient and realistic understanding of their priorities and constraints in implementing a trade policy. We then consider how the UK is currently performing against these criteria, accepting that one would expect this to be to a degree a work in progress. However, this analysis should inform the priorities for future work.

There are few issues that causemore controversy in internationaltrade policy than agriculture. TheEU's overall agriculture policy, includingdomestic support, tariffs,and Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQs),are an ongoing irritant with tradepartners. The UK government hasspoken of being more liberal.This is the context for the UK'sfirst international trade negotiationsince the Brexit vote, to set our futureWTO schedules, including calculatingour TRQs. There has beenoptimistic talk from UK Ministersand influential advisers about UKleadership helping renew the impetusfor trade liberalisation at theWTO. This process could thereforebe an opportunity for the UK toshow a liberalising instinct, and asensitivity towards the differing interestsof different countries.So far the UK is struggling. Theproposed approach to assert anew schedule, calculated on thebasis of average historical usageof the previous EU TRQs, is seenby agricultural exporters as counterto WTO rules as they would suffera loss of market access fromthe loss of flexibility, and failureto account for produce currentlycrossing borders once inside theEU. Given that all countries haveto certify the schedule, a full negotiationwill be needed. The EU,who joined the UK in proposingthis approach, have now acceptedthis need. The UK governmenthas sent mixed signals regardingfollowing this lead, but we expectthey will need to do so shortly.The UK needs to find a new moreliberal approach in line with Governmentpolicy. The UK WithdrawalAgreement may provide a periodof time during which unfetteredtrade with the EU will continue,which should allow continuing singlemanagement of the existingTRQs in the short term. The UKshould use this extra time to runa domestic consultation processwith a Green Paper on agricultureand trade, aiming at an outcomethat will deliver liberalisation alongsideclarity and reassurance fordomestic interests. The evidencesuggests that such an outcome isattainable.In the event that the UK leaves theEU without a deal in March 2019the UK's current approach willalso not work, given the existingtrade between the two, and woulddefinitely require a significant renegotiationby both EU and UKafter a short term solution was putin place. Thus the case for the UKtaking a fresh look at splitting TariffRate Quotas would seem to beoverwhelming. It should be fine toadmit that the initial approach wasoptimistic, and that having nowconsidered further we are going todeliver something better.

AbstractSituated in the borderlands of Southeast Europe, this essay explores how enduring patterns of transregional circulation and cosmopolitan sensibility unfold in the lives of dervish brotherhoods in the post-Cold War present. Following recent debates on connected histories in post-colonial studies and historical anthropology, long-standing mobile and circulating societies, and reinvigorated interest in empire, this essay focuses ethnographically on how members of a dervish brotherhood in Bosnia-Herzegovina cultivate relations with places, collectivities, and practices that exist on different temporal, spatial and geopolitical scales. These connections are centered around three modes of articulation—sonic, graphic, and genealogical—through which the dervish disciples imagine and realize transregional relations. This essay begins and concludes with a meditation on the need for a dialogue between ethnography and transregional history in order to appreciate modes of identification and imagination that go beyond the essentializing forms of collective identity that, in the post-imperial epoch, have been dominated by political and methodological nationalism.