Suchergebnisse

Most would agree that the recent emergence of the Donetsk and Lugansk Republics in Ukraine, and perhaps the Islamic State, will soon find their place in the already growing literature on contested states. Yet, despite the historical and present importance of these entities for the study of alternative forms of political authority, sovereignty, statehood, international legitimacy, as well as wars within and between states, there is very little agreement in the existing literature on what constitutes a contested state. After illustrating some of the theoretical and empirical shortcomings of the current conceptual approaches in the treatment of these entities, this article proposes and adopts an ontological approach to conceptualizing and studying contested states in international relations. I argue that the contested state's internal nature can be understood through four constitutive dimensions, which accentuate the phenomenon's distinct interaction with its environment when compared to other phenomena. The article also provides a way to resolve the discord that currently exists on what the theoretical concept of contested state ought to capture empirically, by introducing an explicit and systematic procedure when applying the concept to the empirical world.

Abstract
Most would agree that the recent emergence of the Donetsk and Lugansk Republics in Ukraine, and perhaps the Islamic State, will soon find their place in the already growing literature on contested states. Yet, despite the historical and present importance of these entities for the study of alternative forms of political authority, sovereignty, statehood, international legitimacy, as well as wars within and between states, there is very little agreement in the existing literature on what constitutes a contested state. After illustrating some of the theoretical and empirical shortcomings of the current conceptual approaches in the treatment of these entities, this article proposes and adopts an ontological approach to conceptualizing and studying contested states in international relations. I argue that the contested state's internal nature can be understood through four constitutive dimensions, which accentuate the phenomenon's distinct interaction with its environment when compared to other phenomena. The article also provides a way to resolve the discord that currently exists on what the theoretical concept of contested state ought to capture empirically, by introducing an explicit and systematic procedure when applying the concept to the empirical world.
Cabe esperar que la gran mayoría coincida en que el surgimiento reciente de las repúblicas de Donetsk y Lugansk en Ucrania, y tal vez el Estado Islámico, encontrarán pronto un lugar en la literatura ya creciente sobre estados en disputa. No obstante, a pesar de la importancia histórica y actual de estas entidades para el estudio de formas alternativas de autoridad política, soberanía, estatidad, legitimación internacional, además de las guerras dentro y entre estados, el consenso en la literatura existente sobre qué constituye un estado en disputa es escaso. Tras ilustrar algunas de las limitaciones teóricas y empíricas de los abordajes conceptuales corrientes en el tratamiento de estas entidades, este artículo propone y adopta un abordaje ontológico en la conceptualización y el estudio de estados en disputa en el marco de las relaciones internacionales. Sostengo que la naturaleza interna de un estado en disputa puede comprenderse a través de cuatro dimensiones constitutivas, que acentúan la interacción distintiva de este fenómeno con su entorno cuando se lo compara con otros. Asimismo, este artículo proporciona una manera de resolver el desacuerdo que existe en la actualidad sobre qué debería abarcar en forma empírica el concepto teórico de estado en disputa al presentar un procedimiento explícito y sistemático en la aplicación del concepto al mundo empírico.
Une grande majorité de personnes conviendront que l'émergence récente des républiques de Donetsk et de Lougansk en Ukraine, et éventuellement de l'État islamique, trouvera bientôt sa place dans la littérature déjà croissante portant sur les États contestés. Pourtant, malgré l'importance historique et actuelle de ces entités pour l'étude des formes alternatives d'autorité politique, de souveraineté, de statut d'État, de légitimité internationale, ainsi que des guerres intérieures et entre États, il y a très peu de consensus dans la littérature existante sur ce qui constitue un État contesté. Après avoir illustré certaines des lacunes théoriques et empiriques des approches conceptuelles actuelles du traitement de ces entités, cet article propose et adopte une approche ontologique de la conceptualisation et de l'étude des États contestés dans les relations internationales. Je soutiens que la nature interne d'un État contesté peut être comprise au travers de quatre dimensions constitutives qui accentuent l'interaction distincte du phénomène avec son environnement lorsque nous le comparons à d'autres phénomènes. Cet article fournit également un moyen de résoudre la discorde qui règne actuellement sur ce que le concept théorique d'État contesté devrait englober empiriquement, en introduisant une procédure explicite et systématique lors de l'application du concept au monde empirique.

Defence date: 23 July 2020 (Online) ; Examining Board: Professor Jennifer Welsh (EUI, Supervisor); Professor Dorothee Bohle (EUI); Professor Nina Caspersen (University of York); Professor Eiki Berg (University of Tartu) ; One of the most fundamental principles underpinning the post-World War II order, on which there is a broad and long-held consensus, is that once admitted into the club of universally recognized states, a political entity's territory and borders become sacred. The phenomenon of the "contested state," however, stubbornly challenges this sacred consensus, by suggesting that the current membership in and territorial configuration of the international society may not be entirely fixed. With three standalone substantive chapters, this thesis investigates three different aspects of contested states' relationship with the existing society of states. In Chapter 1, I attempt to make sense of the existence of these entities alongside other actors in the international system. By employing an ontological approach, I argue that a constellation of four dimensions constitutes a contested state as an independent non-UN member state, over which another State lays claim. My approach not only establishes these entities more clearly as a separate analytical category in world politics, worthy of detailed study, but also specifies these entities' distinct behavior when compared to other actors populating the same international system. Departing from the empirical reality that more than half of the thirty contested states have already died, Chapter 2 investigates the conditions under which contested states survive in the post-1945 international order. By employing an original time-series dataset and applying a comparative configurational analysis of the universe of cases of contested states, I show that three pathways to survival sufficiently capture the patterns underlying the persistence of these entities. The Chapter shows that, while external support is not a necessary condition for contested state survival, what happens outside a contested state's own "domestic" realm, nevertheless, plays a crucial role in keeping these entities alive. The findings of this Chapter unearth a contradiction that exists between the prerogatives of territorial integrity and the aims for peace and stability of the post-WWII international legal and normative order. Chapter 3 conducts a critical analysis of the nature and effect of contested states' struggle for recognition by focusing on Palestine and Kosovo. While seeking recognition and maintaining the hope of eventual membership in the society of states is an understandable objective, I argue that for contested states, recognition has a price. The post-WWII international legal and normative order has presented contested states with a trade-off. In seeking to achieve universal international recognition, contested states must curb their claims to self-determination and sacrifice some of the elements of empirical statehood they have managed to establish. Taken together, these chapters make a set of empirical, methodological, and theoretical contributions, not only for the study of contested states but also for the general discipline of IR.

"This book presents an analytical framework which assesses how 'land-for-peace' agreements can be achieved in the context of territorial conflicts between de facto states and their respective parent states. The volume examines geographic solutions to resolving ongoing conflicts that stand between the principle of self-determination (prompted by de facto states) and the principle of territorial integrity (prompted by parent states). The authors investigate the conditions under which territorial adjustments can bring about a possibility for peace between de facto states and their parent states. It does so by interrogating the possibility of land-for-peace agreements in four de facto state-parent state pairs, namely: Kosovo-Serbia, Nagorno-Karabakh-Azerbaijan, Northern Cyprus-Republic of Cyprus, and Abkhazia-Georgia. The book suggests that the value that parties put on land to be exchanged and peace to be achieved stand at odds for land-for-peace agreements to materialise. The book brings theoretical and empirical insights that open several avenues for discussions on the conservative stance that the international community has held on territorial changes in the post-1945 international order. This book will be of much interest to students of statebuilding, state formation, secessionism, political geography and international relations"--

Abstract
Why do some people resolve disputes through the state, while others use religious or customary justice? We address this question by conducting a vignette experiment in Kosovo. We design hypothetical situations in which fictitious characters are involved in disputes regarding inheritance, debt, domestic violence, and murder. We vary information concerning (i) vignette characters' resources, (ii) their beliefs about the efficiency of state justice, and (iii) dispute settlement customs in the characters' communities. Survey respondents assess whether a vignette character is likely to seek informal justice, given the described circumstances. We find that respondents associate informal justice with characters who believe that the state would resolve their disputes very slowly, and whose other community members would not use state justice. These findings generalize to respondents' own justice preferences and patterns of actual informal dispute settlement in Kosovo and beyond. Our article highlights efficiency concerns and local conventions as explanations of informal justice.

AbstractThis article examines recent Great Powers' revisionist attempts at challenging the post–World War II norm of territorial integrity. These attempts may invigorate sovereignty claims in the old-time fashion of buying, swapping, or annexing territories. We show that recent dynamics in international politics speak a language that challenges the status quo consensus in territorial matters. While the article focuses mainly on the evidence during the period of Trump presidency, it concludes that this is not only about "Trump just being Trump." The article shows that despite changes in domestic power in the United States, no changes in, or challenges to, Trump's decisions and proposals regarding territorial revisionisms have taken place. With several brief illustrative examples on board, the article tries to assess how the contemporary international order based on fixed territorial entities and inviolability of borders is contrasted by representations manifested in contemporary sovereignty practices.