Comparative Politics

B21 - The Politics of Belonging and Exclusion

Date: Jun 1 | Time: 03:15pm to 04:45pm | Location: Classroom - CL 305 Room ID:15734

Chair/Président/Présidente : Netina Tan (McMaster University)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Netina Tan (McMaster University)

The Consequences of Iraqi Kurdistan's Independence Referendum: Zheger Hassan (King's University College)
Abstract: Iraqi Kurdistan’s independence referendum, which included oil-rich Kirkuk and other disputed territories, was held on 25 September 2017 and over 90% of eligible voters voted in favour of separating from Iraq. The referendum is the culmination of long-held grievances by Kurds against the central government. The Kurds accuse Baghdad of willfully ignoring Iraq’s constitution and withholding Iraqi Kurdistan’s share of the annual budget. Since 2005, the Kurds have been demanding a federal and democratic Iraq, which, according to Kurdish officials, did not materialize. From the Kurdish position, Baghdad has failed to adhere to the terms of the 2005 constitution, the most important of which include Iraqi Kurdistan’s political and economic autonomy, the resolution of the disputed territories, and Kurds’ share of Iraq’s annual budget.  The startling series of events following Iraqi Kurdistan’s contentious interdependence referendum raised three key questions: First, why did the Kurds hold the referendum at a time of so much political uncertainty and opposition from Baghdad and the international community? Second, why did the peshmerga relinquish control of Kirkuk to Baghdad? Finally, what are the short- to medium-term consequences of the referendum and the battle for Kirkuk? This article argues that Kurdish demands for independence and the battle for Kirkuk are symptoms of broader issues between Iraqi Kurdistan and Baghdad. These unaddressed issues include political divisions within Iraqi Kurdistan, Iraq’s unwillingness to resolve longstanding disputes between the Kurds and Baghdad, and, finally, the international community’s mishandling of the Kurd-Baghdad relationship.

904.Hassan.pdf

Interpretivist Ethnography in Action: Cross-cultural Research in Post-genocide Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda: Maria Krause (Queen's University)
Abstract: Conducting research in post-genocide societies, where trust and security have been largely eroded, is replete with challenges. When conducted cross-culturally, these challenges are compounded by significant ethical dilemmas borne largely out of resource imbalance, cultural ignorance, and abusive historical legacies. Yet, research in such contexts is imperative to understanding how to prevent future violence and promote reconciliation. Drawing upon a year of fieldwork in post-genocide Rwanda and Bosnia-Herzegovina, I argue that interpretive ethnography offers a way forward in addressing these challenges. Largely unexplored in Political Science, interpretivism recognizes the researcher’s positionality and the power of her research questions to illuminate particular data, while obscuring others. In response, interpretivists employ highly flexible research designs that rely on knowledge co-creation with participants and focus on local meaning-making processes (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2013). This approach is particularly effective for revealing processes of identification and reconciliation and for creating space for meaningful contributions by participants, even when these contributions are represented by silences. Ethnography deepens the effectiveness of interpretivism by immersing researchers within the context under study. This provides access to spaces often obfuscated by a researcher’s cultural lens and reveals power relations governing the multiple dimensions of her identity. It can also foster trust between researcher and participant by promoting relationships of accountability. By exploring interpretive ethnography in action, this paper provides future researchers with new tools to ethically and effectively conduct research in both cross-cultural and post-genocide societies, while also contributing to the larger discussion around research methods and ethics.

Politics of Memory and Nativism: Kate Korycki (University of Toronto)
Abstract: In this work I theorize how the past is politicized in nativist political appeals, how it enters the political language, and what effects it produces. Adapting and expanding the framework of collective memory for the use in political parties literature, and anchoring the story in post-transition Poland, I argue that a) the narratives of past structure political competition, and b) affect the present-day imaginary of common belonging - that is, they determine political positions of players and they reveal who is included and excluded from the conception of the ‘we.’ First, I develop the concept of mnemonic capital - a politically productive symbolic resource that accrues to political players based on their turn to, and judgment of, the past - and demonstrate how the distribution of that capital results in sharply differentiated political identities. Second, I trace how narratives of the past constitute the boundary of the ‘we,’ and I explain how narrating the past elevates the nation and narrows its meaning to ascriptive ethnicity. Third, I argue that the field of politics and the field of belonging interact: I develop a concept of a mnemonic procedure - a patterned and relational way of narrating the past - to show how the narrative techniques performed for present-day political payoffs, constrain the vision of a polity. My theory challenges the political parties literature by advancing a concept of political capitals - distinct from strategies and political identities - that parties develop and amass in their electoral struggles.

Everyday Transnationalisms: High and Low Status Transnationalisms in Beirut and Ramallah: Emily Regan Wills (University of Ottawa)
Abstract: The Arab world is profoundly transnationalized--meaning that money, people, and ideas circulate among Arab countries and between the Arab world, the rest of Asia and Africa, and Europe and the Americas on a daily basis, influencing governments, businesses, society, and culture. This paper will compare how these flows impact the texture of everyday political and social life in Beirut and Ramallah, cities with profoundly transnational populations and institutions. I argue that in both cities, varying forms of transnationalism are assigned high and low status, but that these rankings are not uniform between the cities. In Lebanon, high-status transnationalisms position Beirut and Beirutis as as well integrated into to the 'centre' of the neocolonial world system; low-status transnationalisms, such as the large presence of migrant workers and the quarter of the population who are refugees from Syria, Iraq, and Palestine, tie the country to its near neighbours and to the global south, and unveil the forms of stability that prevent Beirut from being fully integrated into that world system. In Ramallah, high-status transnationalisms represent resources and mobility to undo the limits placed on Palestinians by the occupation, while lower-status transnationalisms further restrict and limit Palestinians. While many high-status forms of transnationalism follow lines of power in the world system, as in Beirut, others do not, which suggest that it is not merely neocolonial ideological frameworks that determine how transnationalisms are integrated into daily life, but the purposes that those transnationalisms can serve within daily practices.