1. Empirically: Only existing comprehensive study of protest in post-revolutionary Egypt from an interactionist and cul-tural perspective; only existing in-depth study of one of the largest massacres in modern history, the Rabaa massacre. 2. Methodology: Unique mixed-methodology and archive of sources (interviews, documentary analysis, statements and press, protest event data). 3. Conceptually: Innovative contribution to theory building on protest arenas through the integration of discourse analysis into a procedural framework for the study of protest-repression dynamics.
Few states in the contemporary world present the complexities that characterize Burma/Myanmar at present. On the one hand, it has been under military rule for some forty-four years at this point, with many traditional factors in operation: an high degree of authoritarianism; the dominance of personalization over institutions; powerful centrism, but with a progressive weakening as the distance from the center lengthens; and the importance of religion as a source of identity. Those who govern Myanmar have given ample indication in recent times of a desire to interact with diverse international bilateral and multilateral operations. Yet Burma/Myanmar nationalism has contained a xenophobic quality emphasized on occasion, a proclivity that is more conducive to isolation than to cooperation. In this context, the movement of the capitol from Rangoon to Pyinmana in the interior, while proclaimed as a move to provide easier access to all parts of Myanmar raises questions. Moreover, as was demonstrated recently, in the face of strong opposition, Myanmar was prepared to give up its scheduled chairmanship of ASEAN rather than to change its domestic political policies. Under the circumstances, it is fortunate to have a highly regarded scholar who has spent many years undertaking in-depth studies of Burma/Myanmar as well as other parts of East Asia, with a history of friendships and research in the region, provide us with an up-to-date analysis. David Steinberg presents a broad picture of the complex scene, commencing with a presentation of key theoretical and historical considerations, and proceeding to an analysis of various specifics relating to the current Burma/Myanmar society and state. His analysis is comprehensive and balanced, taking into account the many complexities and uncertainties of this troubled state. We are indeed fortunate to have this work available. from the Foreword by Robert A. Scalapino
At noon on August 9, 2014 when Michael Brown was killed on Canfield Drive in Ferguson, there was little protest. But by 9 pm, dozens were nonviolently defying police armed with military style weapons, armored vehicles, helicopters, and snarling dogs. The structural situation alone cannot account for the emergence of insurgency in Ferguson. To explain mobilization, I advance a theory of Contested Legitimacy. The stakes of each action by insurgents, authorities, and third parties for mobilization concern regulatory repression. Actions that undercut the validity of repression encourage mobilization. Video, photo, and textual data make it possible to unpack the complex interactive process of mobilization. Given longstanding grievances concerning racist policing in Ferguson, reclaiming the site where Michael Brown was killed on Canfield Drive as a memorial provided means to challenge unjust police authority. When police responded as accustomed– disproportionately, callous, and indiscriminate – their actions galvanized local Black support for activists.
"Examines the role in Chilean politics during the 1970s and 1980s of cultural beliefs and values surrounding the family. Draws on election propaganda, political speeches, press releases, public service campaigns, magazines, newspaper articles, and televised political advertisements"--Provided by publisher.
In spite of the lack of plausible alternatives to liberal democracy, the age of globalization has ushered in serious challenges to the democratic legitimacy of the nation state. The contributors in this collection explore the frontiers of normative and empirical legitimacy research, drawing upon a range of key conceptual and methodological issues.
Legitimacy is central for the capacity of global governance institutions to address problems such as climate change, trade protectionism, and human rights abuses. However, despite legitimacy's importance for global governance, its workings remain poorly understood. That is the core concern of this volume: to develop an agenda for systematic and comparative research on legitimacy in global governance. In complementary fashion, the chapters address different aspects of the overarching question: whether, why, how, and with what consequences global governance institutions gain, sustain, and lose legitimacy? The volume makes four specific contributions. First, it argues for a sociological approach to legitimacy, centered on perceptions of legitimate global governance among affected audiences. Second, it moves beyond the traditional focus on states as the principal audience for legitimacy in global governance and considers a full spectrum of actors from governments to citizens. Third, it advocates a comparative approach to the study of legitimacy in global governance, and suggests strategies for comparison across institutions, issue areas, countries, societal groups, and time. Fourth, the volume offers the most comprehensive treatment so far of the sociological legitimacy of global governance, covering three broad analytical themes: (1) sources of legitimacy, (2) processes of legitimation and delegitimation, and (3) consequences of legitimacy.
In International Intervention and the Problem of Legitimacy Andrew C. Gilbert argues for an ethnographic analysis of international intervention as a series of encounters, focusing on the relations of difference and inequality, and the question of legitimacy that permeate such encounters. He discusses the transformations that happen in everyday engagements between intervention agents and their target populations, and also identifies key instabilities that emerge out of such engagements. Gilbert highlights the struggles, entanglements and inter-dependencies between and among foreign agents, and the people of Bosnia-Herzegovina that channel and shape intervention and how it unfolds. Drawing upon nearly two years of fieldwork studying in postwar Bosnia and Herzegovina, Gilbert's probing analysis identifies previously overlooked sites, processes, and effects of international intervention, and suggests new comparative opportunities for the study of transnational action that seeks to save and secure human lives and improve the human condition. Above all, International Intervention and the Problem of Legitimacy foregrounds and analyzes the open-ended, innovative, and unpredictable nature of international intervention that is usually omitted from the ordered representations of the technocratic vision and the confident assertions of many critiques.
The politics of legitimacy is central to international relations. When states perceive an international organization as legitimate, they defer to it, associate themselves with it, and invoke its symbols. Examining the United Nations Security Council, Ian Hurd demonstrates how legitimacy is created, used, and contested in international relations. The Council's authority depends on its legitimacy, and therefore its legitimation and delegitimation are of the highest importance to states. Through an examination of the politics of the Security Council, including the Iraq invasion and the negotiating history of the United Nations Charter, Hurd shows that when states use the Council's legitimacy for their own purposes, they reaffirm its stature and find themselves contributing to its authority. Case studies of the Libyan sanctions, peacekeeping efforts, and the symbolic politics of the Council demonstrate how the legitimacy of the Council shapes world politics and how legitimated authority can be transferred from states to international organizations. With authority shared between states and other institutions, the interstate system is not a realm of anarchy. Sovereignty is distributed among institutions that have power because they are perceived as legitimate. This book's innovative approach to international organizations and international relations theory lends new insight into interactions between sovereign states and the United Nations, and between legitimacy and the exercise of power in international relations.
This study traces the historic course of diplomatic competition between the rival Koreas within the context of a changing international system. Korea versus Koreaspans the years from 1948 through the North Korean nuclear crisis of 1994, examining the myriad diplomatic successes and failures of North and South Korea during this period. Written from a post-Cold War perspective, the volume takes a distinctly non-partisan position on the Korean problem. This innovative analysis focuses on the dynamic interaction of domestic and international political economies and their effects on the conduct of diplomacy. The result is a new interpretation of the importance of adaptability in determining success in international relations. Barry Gills concludes with a consideration of the possibilities of unification in the Korean Peninsula.
One of the most noted developments in international law over the past twenty years is the proliferation of international courts and tribunals. They decide who has the right to exploit natural resources, define the scope of human rights, delimit international boundaries and determine when the use of force is prohibited. As the number and influence of international courts grow, so too do challenges to their legitimacy. This volume provides new interdisciplinary insights into international courts' legitimacy: what drives and undermines the legitimacy of these bodies? How do drivers change depending on the court concerned? What is the link between legitimacy, democracy, effectiveness and justice? Top international experts analyse legitimacy for specific international courts, as well as the links between legitimacy and cross-cutting themes. Failure to understand and respond to legitimacy concerns can endanger both the courts and the law they interpret and apply.
