Good radicals? Trajectories of pro-Kurdish political and militant mobilisation to the wars in Syria,Turkey and Iraq

ABSTRACT

This article explores the interrelation of volunteering, violence and ideology by studying the pro-Kurdish political and militant mobilisation to the wars in Syria, Turkey and Iraq. Focusing especially on the trajectories, motives and reflections of foreign volunteers in different Kurdish militant groups, I argue that ideology is neither a precondition nor a necessary reason for mobilisation to an armed group. In many cases, it is the other way around, as mobilisation to violence is often the source of ideological conviction.     

A small state’s anticipation of institutional change: effects of the looming Brexit in the areas of the CSDP and internal market

ABSTRACT

Brexit will profoundly change politics in the European Union, and all countries will have to adjust to the new situation. But the issue is more pressing for small member states that are more dependent on international organisations than big states. This article studies how the institutional setting affects a small state’s preparations for Brexit in the areas of the common security and defence policy and internal market. Contrary to the expectations, it shows that the Czech Republic, the small state under scrutiny, has invested more effort into a preventive adjustment in the internal market policy than to the CSDP. This result is explained by the existence of alternative institutional frameworks that are expected to mitigate the impact of Brexit on EU’s security and defence policy. It also suggests that while small states profit from the existence of strong institutions, they also face the risk of unmitigated impact when these institutions change.     

Legitimacy,Identity and Climate Change: moving from international to world society?

Resource scarcity and climate change could provoke major inter-state and intra-state violence and humanitarian emergencies, an especial threat to the global South. This article examines the dynamics that have followed the major violent crises of the past few centuries to determine whether climate-change-induced conflict might paradoxically generate norms of non-violence and collective identification, and in turn lead to a more co-operative culture of anarchy. Especially since 1945 we have witnessed the development of a ‘security community’ in the North Atlantic—that is, a group of states that not only resolve conflict without resort to violence but also consider war among their members unthinkable. Such communities might develop in other regions in two stages. First, state internalisation of liberal norms of democracy and human rights may enhance the role of intergovernmental organisations in mitigating climate-change-induced conflict. Second, collective identification among states and individuals may be stimulated by structural similarity between increasingly democratic states, the perception of a common fate arising from shared threats, and an expanding global civil society and epistemic communities preoccupied with climate change. Climate change could thus spur movement towards more legitimate and authoritative intergovernmental organisations within a world society that would be more effective at solving common problems than those operating within today's more fragmented international society.     

What a Little Democracy Can Do: Comparing Trajectories of Reform in Malaysia and Indonesia

Economic crisis sparked political mobilization in both Malaysia and Indonesia in the late 1990s, but with very different results. Reformism in competitive electoral authoritarian Malaysia took a largely electoral route, yielding marginal, top-down institutional change and the enhancement of democratic norms. The hegemonic electoral authoritarian regime in neighbouring Indonesia, on the other hand, was toppled by a sudden upsurge of grass-roots protest, encouraged by elite factionalism. Changes to Indonesian political institutions and personnel since then have disappointed many reformers, and mounting cynicism endangers the entrenchment of democratic political culture. The article argues that a relatively more democratic system grants more space for autonomous challengers to organize and mobilize over the long term than a less open system does. Specifically, civil society agents in the former may accumulate both social capital and its organizational-level counterpart, coalitional capital, facilitating mobilization. Such a regime, though, is better able to contain or otherwise defuse protest than is a more autocratic variant. The latter is thus more vulnerable to dramatic collapse, despite its fragmented political opposition, and faces serious hurdles in subsequent democratic consolidation.     

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR STUDYING THE SOURCES OF VARIATION IN PROGRAM EFFECTS

Evaluations of public programs in many fields reveal that different types of programs—or different versions of the same program—vary in their effectiveness. Moreover, a program that is effective for one group of people might not be effective for other groups, and a program that is effective in one set of circumstances may not be effective in other circumstances. This paper presents a conceptual framework for research on such variation in program effects and the sources of this variation. The framework is intended to help researchers—both those who focus mainly on studying program implementation and those who focus mainly on estimating program effects—see how their respective pieces fit together in a way that helps to identify factors that explain variation in program effects, and thereby support more systematic data collection. The ultimate goal of the framework is to enable researchers to offer better guidance to policymakers and program operators on the conditions and practices that are associated with larger and more positive effects.