Restoring Ethnic Democracy: The Or Commission and Palestinian Citizenship in Israel

Israel's Palestinian citizens have historically enjoyed limited individual rights, but no collective rights. Their status as rights-bearing citizens was highlighted in 1967, with the imposition of Israel's military rule on the non-citizen Palestinians living in the occupied territories. It was the citizenship status of its Palestinian citizens that qualified Israel, a self-defined “Jewish and democratic state”, as an “ethnic democracy”. In October 2000 Israeli police killed 13 citizen Palestinians who participated in violent but unarmed demonstrations to protest the killing of non-citizen Palestinians in the occupied territories. Both the citizen Palestinian demonstrators and the police were engaged in acts of citizenship: the former were asserting their right as Israeli citizens to protest the actions of their government in the occupied territories, while the latter attempted to deny them that right and erase the difference between citizen and non-citizen Palestinians. Significantly, no Jewish demonstrator has ever been killed by police in Israel, no matter how violent his or her behavior. In November 2000 a commission of inquiry was appointed to investigate the killings. Its report, published in September 2003, is yet another act of citizenship: it seeks to restore the civil status of the citizen Palestinians to where it was before October 2000, that is, to the status of second-class citizens in an ethnic democracy. The Commission sought to achieve this end by undertaking a dual move: while relating the continuous violation of the Palestinians' citizenship rights by the state, it demanded that they adhere to their obligation to protest this violation within the narrow limits of the law. This article's key question is: could the Commission, by viewing the behavior of the Palestinian protestors as legitimate civil disobedience, have encouraged the evolution of Israel from an ethnic to a liberal democracy?     

Ethnic Citizenship in the Slovenian State

This article presents some crucial and typical experiences of people who were erased from the Registry of Permanent Residents of the Republic of Slovenia in 1992. In the process of forming the new Slovenian state in 1991 (after the collapse of former Yugoslavia), the body of citizens was newly defined according to the principle of ius sanguinis. This means that ethnic Slovenians who until then were Yugoslav citizens automatically became Slovenian citizens. Permanent residents of Slovenia who ethnically originated in other republics of former Yugoslavia had to file an application to acquire Slovenian citizenship based on Article 40 of the Citizenship of the Republic of Slovenia Act. Approximately 0.9% of Slovenia's population (18,305 people) did not succeed in obtaining Slovenian citizenship because either they did not file an application or their application was rejected. These people were erased from the Registry of Permanent Residents by the Ministry of Internal Affairs on 26 February 1992. The Ministry carried out this secret erasure without any legal basis. The Aliens Act entered into force for the erased which then annulled all their previously acquired rights; legally and formally they were made equivalent to migrants who cross borders illegally. Thus, the people erased from the Registry of Permanent Residents were suddenly left without any rights: the right to a residence in Slovenia (in their homes with their families), the right to cross the state borders, and all other economic, social and political rights. The implementation of the erasure concerns the suspension of basic human rights, the annulment of the principles of a legal state and the production of redundant people. The author argues that the erasure from the Registry of Permanent Residents is constitutive of Slovenian citizenship: the erasure established certain power relations in society and a certain type of democracy.     

Differentiated Citizenship and Ethnocultural Groups: A Japanese Case

It is a widely shared view that Japan is a culturally homogeneous country. This view is often deployed as justification for certain policy orientations to preserve cultural homogeneity. The goal of this article is to show that this line of thought is not acceptable on empirical and normative grounds. By considering two representative ethnocultural minorities—Ainu and Koreans—in terms of cultural, social, and political rights, I illustrate that there exists not only a plurality of ethnocultural groups in Japan with distinct claims to differentiated citizenship but also institutions and practices accommodating them. Moreover, a set of principles of differentiated citizenship underlying those institutions and practices are outlined. Finally, on the basis of the foregoing analysis, I argue that public policies attempt to preserve a cultural homogeneity that does not exist and such political aims as “enhancing social unity” are morally and prudentially undesirable.     

Citizenship and Democracy: A Journey to Europe's Past

The relationship between citizenship and democracy is poorly understood, and the two notions are often used synonymously. Governing is obviously the central issue, but whereas citizenship seems to require self-limitation by calling on civic virtues, democracy is actually enlarging citizens' power. The Polish and Dutch Republics from the seventeenth and eighteenth century present an interesting mirror image of how citizenship and democracy relate to each other in political practice.     

European Governance and Civic Participation: Beyond Elitist Citizenship?

Since the end of the 1990s, 'new modes of governance' have been presented by academics and political actors as an answer to the EU's 'democratic deficit'. Analysing the intellectual roots of this idea, and the concrete proposals made by those who, like the European Commission, support it, this paper argues that it is very unlikely to reach this ambitious purpose. Far from breaking with the Community method, these participatory mechanisms constitute extensions of existing practices, and are underpinned by the same élitist and functionalist philosophy. They remain limited to 'stakeholders' and will not improve the 'enlighted understanding' of ordinary citizens and the general level of participation. The paper examines the obstacles to the politicisation of the EU inherent in its institutional model, and discusses other options which might help bypass the limits of 'governance'.     

Citizenship in a Post-Westphalian Community: Beyond External Exclusion?

This article discusses the potential for reducing the externally exclusionary aspects of citizenship in a post-Westphalian community, as conceptualised in Andrew Linklater's critical theory. Linklater's claim that post-sovereign developments in the European Union provide encouraging signs in this regard is evaluated in the light of the EU's attempted harmonisation of free movement, asylum and immigration policies. It is argued that the case of the EU provides little support for Linklater's assumptions, largely because: (1) the theory fails to recognise the exclusionary consequences of the differentiation of outsider status; and (2) it relies too much on the causal effects of institutional frameworks. While fully supporting the theory's normative stance I suggest that the strong reliance on institutional remedies may have counterproductive effects, and thus that the regionally restricted attempt to externalise aspects of citizenship, while pushing the exclusionary boundary further outwards, has not eliminated the insider-outsider distinction in an EU context.     

Beyond the Developmental State: The Cultural Roots of "Guerrilla Capitalism" in Taiwan

This article seeks to contribute to the emerging literature on moving "beyond the developmental state" by tracing the important role of "guerrilla capitalism" in Taiwan's political economy. The success of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) with little linkage to the state in Taiwan strongly suggests that more than state leadership must have been involved in the island's "economic miracle." The SMEs are quite important for the overall economy, especiaiiy the export sector where they have long accounted for more than half of total exports. Their success has resulted from the practice of "guerrilla capitalism" which includes aggressive and even audacious pursuit of business opportunities, extreme flexibility in rapidly filling even small orders, atten tion to quality and design, audacious bidding, participation in complex networks of subcontracting, and only partial observation at best of government regulations and international laws, such as those regarding intellectual property rights. The emergence of guerrilla capifalism, in turn, can be explained by the long-sfanding challenge in Chinese history to "official" Confucianism by a "heterodox counterculture" that is quite conducive to entrepreneurship and small-scale business activities.