Final Flashcards
Main parts of social cohesion
- Trust and in particular social (i.e., ‘generalized’) trust
- Trust and confidence in state and social institutions
- Acceptance/respect/tolerance/openness with regard to diversity
- Common identification
Security Dilemma
- Weak federal government
- Vacuum of power
- The advantage of striking first
- Increase the insecurity of others
Study of social cohesion
The study of social cohesion entails understanding the factors that contribute to the togetherness of society as a whole.
–> The UNDP has recognized the importance of social cohesion for peace-building and sustainable development.
Buraj on why economic rivalry not sufficient for yugoslavia
It does not explain why people engage politically as doing so is irrational. Pursuit of individual self-interest does not explain torture, murder, or risking one’s own life in battle.
Spiral of insecurity
- Anarchy was not the cause of the run-up to war, but the result of the run-up to war.
- Security dilemmas did not arise between Croatia and Slovenia despite some border disputes; neither did Macedonia feel compelled to arm itself against Serbia in spite of historical rivalry.
Symbolic politics and Yugoslavia
- -> hostile myths
- -> Ethnic symbols= tool for elites to use in mobilizing ethnic groups.
- ->Ethnic symbols only work when there is some real or perceived conflict of interest at work and mythically based feelings of hostility
These hostile myths and extreme goals, not the mere fact of anarchy, created the fears that set off a security dilemma and motivated the drive to war.
Ethnic symbols and motivation
–> All elements needed to make mobilization happen: –>need perceived conflicts of interest for reason to mobilize. –>Need emotional commitment based on hostile feelings,
–> need leadership to organize.
Myth-symbol complex
Core of ethnic identity= combo of myths, memories, values, and symbols that defines not only who is a member of the group but what it means to be a member
Key conditions for symbolist
Myths justifying ethnic hostility
Ethnic fears
Opportunity to mobilize and fight
Buraj explains fall of Yugoslavia
- -> elite-led violence (but not only)
- ->Government extreme nationalism
- ->Aided by a Chauvinist nationalist mythology
- ->Symbol manipulation
- ->Backlash brought to power defensive nationalist in other republics
- –>Manipulation of symbol of Kosovo lead to manipulation of others symbols
- ->Resentment amplified by economic downturn
symbolic synthesis
People make political choices based on emotion and in response to symbols
Risk of intervention
- Responsibility to protect
- Norm in 90s to intervene
- Encourages rebel groups of vulnerable populations
- Sometimes it may help to achieve the goal
- Provokes retaliation from state
- Creates a situation of moral hazard: situation in which there is no guarantee for insurance
Moral hazard of humanitarian intervention
- -> “Responsibility to protect”
- -> Sub-state actors rebel because expect relation, enabling success
- -> state retaliates with genocidal violence before intervention
- -> intervention helps some rebels succeed and encourages new ones
Groups vulnerable to genocidal retaliation
- Do not perceive credible threat by state to retaliate
- expect victimization anyway, nothing to lose
- Expect victory at tolerable cost w/out intervention
- Expect intervention to enable victory at tolerable cost
- Do not behave as unitary rational actors
Players in military intervention
a) state, b) sub state, and c) interveners