Politički, sigurnosni i pravni izazovi: dileme oko manjinskih pitanja u Europi

The nation-state has been redefined, and yet issues that affect it in its current form have been left unchanged. Issues of refugees and migrations have not been legislated since 1951 at the global level and turn of the millennium at the EU level. National minorities are perceived as a threat in “new” Europe while international organisations that should help central and eastern European states are being controlled by the West and are acting in the primary interest of western countries. Duality is thus being reinforced and accentuated. The EU, Council of Europe and the OSCE are seemingly ignoring the process of significant racial, religious, cultural and civilizational change across Europe. Weaker states are therefore unprepared and unsupported to deal with their minority issues and especially with the issues of new migrations to Europe. National sovereignty is connected with the securitisation of minority issues, in particular in Central and Eastern Europe. The process benefits ethno-nationalist populists that form governments that often create political pressure and economic instability, thus pushing their citizens to emigrate to “old” Europe. The process of reacting and antagonising immigrants is being repeated, and the whole of Europe is facing a problem functioning liberal democracies could solve with reformed modus operandi of international organisations.Nacionalna država je redefinirana, dok su pitanja koja utječu na njezin današnji oblik ostala nepromijenjena. Pitanja izbjeglica i migracija nisu bila predmetom pravnog reguliranja od 1951. godine na globalnoj razini te od početka novog tisućljeća na razini EU. Nacionalne manjine doživljavaju se kao prijetnja u “novoj” Europi dok su međunarodne organizacije koje bi trebale pomoći državama Srednje i Istočne Europe pod kontrolom Zapada i djeluju primarno u interesu zapadnih država. Na taj način dolazi do osnaživanja i naglašavanja dualnosti. Dojam je da Europska Unija, Vijeće Europe i OESS ignoriraju proces značajnih rasnih, religijskih, kulturnih i civilizacijskih promjena u Europi. Stoga su slabije države nepripremljene i nespremne baviti se manjinskim pitanjima, a posebice pitanjem novih migracija u Europi. Nacionalna suverenost povezana je sa sekuritizacijom manjinskih pitanja, posebice u Srednjoj i Istočnoj Europi. Taj proces na ruku ide etno-nacionalističkim populistima koji ulaze u vlade, koje često stvaraju politički pritisak i ekonomsku nestabilnost potičući tako građane da emigriranju u “staru” Europu. Proces reakcije i antagoniziranja imigranata se ponavlja, a cijela Europa suočena je s problemom koji bi mogle riješiti funkcionalne liberalne demokracije promjenom modusa operandi međunarodnih organizacija

Politički, sigurnosni i pravni izazovi: dileme oko manjinskih pitanja u Europi

The nation-state has been redefined, and yet issues that affect it in its current form have been left unchanged. Issues of refugees and migrations have not been legislated since 1951 at the global level and turn of the millennium at the EU level. National minorities are perceived as a threat in “new” Europe while international organisations that should help central and eastern European states are being controlled by the West and are acting in the primary interest of western countries. Duality is thus being reinforced and accentuated. The EU, Council of Europe and the OSCE are seemingly ignoring the process of significant racial, religious, cultural and civilizational change across Europe. Weaker states are therefore unprepared and unsupported to deal with their minority issues and especially with the issues of new migrations to Europe. National sovereignty is connected with the securitisation of minority issues, in particular in Central and Eastern Europe. The process benefits ethno-nationalist populists that form governments that often create political pressure and economic instability, thus pushing their citizens to emigrate to “old” Europe. The process of reacting and antagonising immigrants is being repeated, and the whole of Europe is facing a problem functioning liberal democracies could solve with reformed modus operandi of international organisations.Nacionalna država je redefinirana, dok su pitanja koja utječu na njezin današnji oblik ostala nepromijenjena. Pitanja izbjeglica i migracija nisu bila predmetom pravnog reguliranja od 1951. godine na globalnoj razini te od početka novog tisućljeća na razini EU. Nacionalne manjine doživljavaju se kao prijetnja u “novoj” Europi dok su međunarodne organizacije koje bi trebale pomoći državama Srednje i Istočne Europe pod kontrolom Zapada i djeluju primarno u interesu zapadnih država. Na taj način dolazi do osnaživanja i naglašavanja dualnosti. Dojam je da Europska Unija, Vijeće Europe i OESS ignoriraju proces značajnih rasnih, religijskih, kulturnih i civilizacijskih promjena u Europi. Stoga su slabije države nepripremljene i nespremne baviti se manjinskim pitanjima, a posebice pitanjem novih migracija u Europi. Nacionalna suverenost povezana je sa sekuritizacijom manjinskih pitanja, posebice u Srednjoj i Istočnoj Europi. Taj proces na ruku ide etno-nacionalističkim populistima koji ulaze u vlade, koje često stvaraju politički pritisak i ekonomsku nestabilnost potičući tako građane da emigriranju u “staru” Europu. Proces reakcije i antagoniziranja imigranata se ponavlja, a cijela Europa suočena je s problemom koji bi mogle riješiti funkcionalne liberalne demokracije promjenom modusa operandi međunarodnih organizacija

Violence Before Identity: An Analysis of Identity Politics

Violence is a force for creating integrities as well as one that violates, pollutes and destroys already existing entities. In this paper I address the role of what Ariella Azoulay terms the ‘political imagination’ in constituting social aggregates committed to the defence of a community itself brought into being by the imagining of a force dedicated to its destruction. Such a group’s perception of what Laclau and Mouffe call an ‘antagonism’ spurs it to mark out and defend its boundaries with violence - a violence often manifested aggressively (pre-emptively). Collective perceptions of an other’s antagonism are often overdetermined, either by historical memory or political manipulation, and it is often the case that an enemy is sited and a programme of ‘defensive’ violence inaugurated without any ‘real’ justification. Here I demonstrate, using events drawn from the formation of the State of Israel and the collapse of what is now ‘Former Yugoslavia’, that it is in designating an other against which destructive violence must be mobilized that an entity realizes - through the negation of that it would negate - what it is it fights to defend