Rational and symbolic components of the ethnopolitical conflicts justification
https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6339-2024-6-171-188
Abstract
This article is devoted to the analysis of the rationalist and symbolic approaches to the ethnopolitical conflicts justification. The authors note that the rationalist approach, which interprets ethnic violence as the result of certain “calculations” made by political agents, splits into two conditional directions. The first direction is based on the idea of an “ethnic security dilemma” and suggests that such conflicts begin with the preventive violence caused by the uncertainty of one of the political agents about the intentions of the opposing side. The second direction is focused on the so-called “predatory elites” who seek to use ethnic violence as a tool to raise their own legitimacy in the conditions when other options have been exhausted. The authors emphasize that these trends do not take into account the psychosymbolic dimension of politics, in particular, they do not consider the fact that ethnic violence may not have a purely rational basis and be the product of the conflict of identities or collective memory, etc. On the contrary, the symbolic interpretation developed by the constructivist political scientists suggests analyzing its myth-symbol complex in order to understand the deep essence of an ethnic conflict, namely, to explore the evocative symbols that become the triggers of political violence. At the same time, this approach does not discount and, to a certain extent, absorbs the rationalist interpretations of ethnic violence. The authors attempt to examine Israel’s military campaign in the Gaza Strip, which began in 2023, through the prism of the rationalist and symbolic approaches.
About the Authors
S. V. Lebedev
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergei V. Lebedev, Cand. of Sci. (Political Science)
49/2, Leningradsky Av., Moscow, 125167
M. N. Grachev
Russian State University for the Humanities
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Mikhail N. Grachev, Dr. of Sci. (Political Science), professor
6, Miusskaya Sq., Moscow, 125047
References
1. Ackermann, А. (1994), “Reconciliation as a peace-building process in postwar Europe: the Franco-German case”, Peace and Change, vol. 19, no. 3, рp. 229–250.
2. Bakalova, M. (2013), “An inquiry into the rationale behind violent ethnic conflicts: a rational choice perspective”, Economic Alternatives, no. 4, pp. 103–115.
3. Bar-Tal, D. (2007), “Sociopsychological foundations of intractable conflicts”, American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 1430–1453.
4. Fearon, J.D. (1999), Why ethnic politics and ‘pork’ tend to go together, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif., June 16, available at: https://web.stanford.edu/group/fearonresearch/cgi-bin/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Pork.pdf (Accessed 28 August 2024).
5. Ferreira, I.A. (2021), “Ethnic conflict, tensions, and protests: taking stock of available cross-country data”, WIDER Technical Note, no. 22, available at: https:// www.wider.unu.edu/sites/default/files/Publications/Technical-note/PDF/tn2021-22-ethnic-conflict-tensions-protests-cross-country-data.pdf (Accessed 28 August 2024).
6. Figueiredo, R.J.P., de and Weingast, B. (1999), “The rationality of fear: political opportunism and ethnic conflict”, in: Walter, B.F. and Snyder, J., eds., Civil Wars, insecurity, and intervention, New York, Columbia University Press, USA, pp. 261–302.
7. Hardin, R. (1995), One for all: the logic of group conflict, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.
8. Horowitz, D.L. (1985), Ethnic groups in conflict, University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif., USA.
9. Kalyvas, S. (2021), “The dynamics of violence in Civil War: evaluating the impact of ethnicity on violence”, The Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, June 28, available at: https://www.hfg.org/grant_summaries/the-dynamics-of-violencein-civil-war-evaluating-the-impact-of-ethnicity-on-violence/ (Accessed 28 August 2024).
10. Karasova, T.A. (2023), “Israel after elections. Political development progress”, Svobodnaya mysl’, vol. 1700, no. 4, pp. 77–88.
11. Kaufman, S.J. (2001), Modern Hatreds: The symbolic politics of ethnic war, Cornell University Press, New York, USA.
12. Kaufman, S.J. (2006), “Symbolic politics or rational choice? Testing theories of extreme ethnic violence”, International Security, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 45–86.
13. Kazantsev, A.A. (2009), “ ‘Constructivist revolution’, or About the role of cultural and civilizational factors in the modern theory of international relations”, Political science (RU), no. 4, pp. 88–114.
14. Maital, S. (2004), “Daniel Kahneman: on redefining rationality”, The Journal of Socio-Economics, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 1–14.
15. Mueller, K.P., Castillo, J.J., Morgan, F.E., Pegahi, N. and Rosen, B. (2006), Striking first: preemptive and preventive attack in U.S. national security policy, RAND Corporation•, Santa Monica, Calif., USA.
16. Posen, B.R. (1993), “The security dilemma and ethnic conflict”, in Brown, M.E., ed., Ethnic conflict and international security, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, pp. 103–124.
17. Rosenberg, D.E. (2023), “Netanyahu hasn’t just lost his credibility on security”, Foreign Policy Magazine, October 17, available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/10/17/israel-hamas-gaza-benjamin-netanyahu-economy-security-polls/ (Accessed 28 August 2024).
18. Ross, M.H. (2001), “Psychocultural interpretations and dramas: identity dynamics in ethnic conflict”, Political Psychology, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 157–178.
19. Ryzhov, I.V., Komakha, A.A. and Borodina, M.Yu. (2023), “Saudi Arabia and State Israel in the context of the Palestinian-Israeli confrontation”, RSUH/RGGU Bulletin. “Political Science. History. International Relations” Series, no. 4, part 3, pp. 393–406.
20. Semenenko, I.S., Lapkin, V.V. and Pantin, V.I. (2016) “Classifying ethnic conflicts. Challenges for political theory and methodology”, Polis. Political Studies, no. 6, pp. 69–94.
21. Smith, A.D. (1999), Myths and memories of the nation, Oxford University Press, New York, USA.
22. Toft, M.D. (2003), The geography of ethnic violence: identity, interests, and indivisibility of Territory, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ., USA.
23. Zvyagel’skaya, I.D. (2019), “Political longevity. Indispensability or lack of alternative? David Ben-Gurion and Benjamin Netanyahu”, Svobodnaya mysl’, vol. 1676, no. 4, pp. 89–101.
Review
For citations:
Lebedev S.V., Grachev M.N. Rational and symbolic components of the ethnopolitical conflicts justification. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin Series "Political Science. History. International Relations". 2024;(6):171-188. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6339-2024-6-171-188
Views:
197
Email this article 