Imagining Islam in Kosovo - The social construction of the Kosovar Muslim subject among European political actors

ABSTRACT

Despite being a Muslim-majority society, Kosovo increasingly securitizes practising Muslims by politicizing the ostentatiously pious among them as a threat to Europe’s security and Kosovar identity. Given the EU’s significant discursive and political power in Kosovo, this article pursues the question of how European representatives conceive of pious Kosovar Muslims, and whether this image might explain their securitization. On the basis of 24 semi-structured interviews with various European officials conducted in 2018, I argue that they predominantly imagine pious Kosovar Muslims as influenced by foreign powers through indoctrination, material incentives or appeals to identity, which does condone their securitization. However, this image is in fact shaped by local Kosovar elites who instil such conceptions in European officials because such an image helps them in the pursuit of their own political agendas. The article exposes the intricate mechanism and power relations that underlie this process of policy-relevant knowledge production.     

The Political Economy of Border Checkpoints in Shadow Exchanges

ABSTRACT

This introductory article revisits cross-border shadow exchanges in a comparative perspective and reflects on their theoretical implications. It explores the diversities and complexities of shadow operations and critically examines the concept of informality that is commonly used to describe such non-state-sanctioned practices. It further underlines the key role played by checkpoint politics in border governance. Border checkpoints serve both as a state institution in regulating border crossings as well as a political site where material and power exchanges among state and non-state actors are negotiated. Such negotiation of selective passage through state-controlled gateways is often predicated upon the skilful manipulation of time and space by experienced traders and brokers.     

Judicial Federalilsm and Equality Guarantees in State Supreme Courts

The new judicial federalism emphasizes state court relianceon state constitutional grounds for the enhanced protectionof individual rights. Commentary in the legal literature givesthe impression of much state court activism in this area. However,a quantitative analysis of 2,286 equal protection cases decidedby state supreme courts between 1975 and 1984 shows much lowerlevels of the exclusive use of state constitutions. The dataalso reveal significant regional variations in the nature ofequal protection cases filed, the types of alleged discrimination,the use of independent and adequate state grounds, and the frequencyof judicial invalidation of state action. These variations areexplored in terms of political culture, the institutional featuresof the state judiciary, and the content of state bills of rights.