One can think of the idea of identity in terms of the individual, or the individual belongs to and the ‘other(s)’ or the ‘outsider(s)'. So I started simply by brainstorming ideas with a class about various kinds of identity and looking for examples of how they influence or may influence international relations. We also thought about international protocols, conventions, covenants and national legislation that deal with issues of identity.
Some ideas
National identity
and nation states (Woodrow Wilson and a people's right to self-determination)
and the modern international community. National identity and other identities
within a state e.g. minority ethnic, linguistic, religious and/or cultural
groups within a state, their treatment and possible aspiration to autonomy or
independence, e.g. the Scots and Welsh, the Basques and Catalans, the Flemish
and Walloons, the Kurds in Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran, the Russian minorities
in Ukraine and other Eastern European states, the Uyghurs in China, but also the German minorities outside Germany in the 1930s and Nazi
policy, Italy, irredentism and the First World War, today Russia and Georgia
and Ukraine etc…
A transnational
identity like a religion, an ethnic group, a linguistic group perhaps, a
cultural group?
A supranational
identity like European identity, citizenship and the idea of multiculturalism
Samuel
Huntington’s ideas about civilization: People
have levels of identity: a resident of Rome may define himself with varying
degrees of intensity as a Roman, an Italian, a Catholic, a Christian, a
European, a Westerner. The civilization to which he belongs is the broadest
level of identification with which he intensely identifies. People can and do
redefine their identities and, as a result, the composition and boundaries of
civilizations change. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/1993-06-01/clash-civilizations
https://www.beyondintractability.org/bksum/huntington-clash
One student's
question “In this essay should we also talk about a state having an 'identity'
or should we keep the focus on people? “I think 'on people' will be easier and
nearer to the words of the essay title, so if you take the state identity line you
should explain in your introduction that this is what you are going to do and
justify it (mentioning other forms of human identity) and then outline the
theory of state identity properly and give clear current examples. However, I
think this means taking a risk and distorting the question. See:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.503.2088&rep=rep1&type=pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(international_relations) and then the link if necessary
In contrast there
is the humanist approach, identity with the human race and every individual,
and thus humanitarianism, human rights and a universal identity (reflected in
international law),
individual and
minority identities, aspirations and rights, e.g. age, class, political, sexual
identity
women’s rights,
including non-discrimination and fair treatment (Saudi Arabia for example, but
also femicide in France
https://www.france24.com/en/20191125-france-unveils-new-measures-to-fight-deadly-domestic-violence https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50531213 https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-50533299/femicide-paris-turns-purple-during-protest-rally
The rights of
religious minorities, including respect for the practice of their religion and
non-discrimination (Jews and Muslims in Europe for example). And atheists in
religious countries.
https://fra.europa.eu/en/news/2023/major-eu-survey-antisemitism-and-jewish-life-launched
The rights of
ethnic minorities, including non-discrimination and
fair treatment and respect for their language and culture, e.g. the Roma or
Romani or Romany people, also known as Gypsies are Europe’s largest
ethnic minority (estimated at 10-12 million across Europe, 6 million in the
EU), https://fra.europa.eu/en/theme/roma
https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2022-roma-survey-2021-main-results_en.pdf
the Kurds in Turkey,
Iraq, Syria and Iran, or the Rwandan genocide of the Tutsi by the Hutu.
The case of Hong
Kong, a Chinese province with protesters claiming political autonomy and some form
of democratic participation based on the British-Chinese
Joint Declaration of 1984 ('one country two systems').
The rights of
social minorities with specific identities, e.g. gays (and more generally LGBT
and LGBTQ+), single
mothers including non-discrimination and fair treatment (e.g. Russia)
The rights of
minorities that may not be recognized as a group e.g. the disabled in all
countries, including non-discrimination and fair treatment
'About
15% of the world's population lives with some form of disability, of whom 2-4%
experience significant difficulties in functioning. The global disability
prevalence is higher than previous WHO estimates, which date from the 1970s and
suggested a figure of around 10%. This global estimate for disability is on the
rise due to population ageing and the rapid spread of chronic diseases, as well
as improvements in the methodologies used to measure disability.'
http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report/en/
Children as a
minority, the rights of non-adults without power (no voting rights, money, may
not be physically strong or mentally mature), their right to a childhood, home
and education, lack of self-awareness as a group, easily exploited, the Nobel
Peace Prize winners for 2014, Malala Yousafzai
Attacks on the
cultural heritage of one group by another and the international reaction it may
provoke e.g. Islamic State’s attack on Palmyra and other classical sites,
attacks on native tribes and their habitat in the Amazon Forest
National
legislation and international protocols and institutions designed to guarantee
the rights of different groups and individuals, or to protect a cultural
identity and its heritage e.g. in the EU, in the UN Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, in the mandate and operation of the International Criminal Court
and the problems involved in concepts like the
Responsibility to Protect
‘Economic identity’
(?) – this is not how people usually describe themselves in terms of
identity but involves the way the UN calls for the rich developed countries to
help eliminate extreme poverty in the least developed countries and how this
may involve a change in the way we see ourselves and others (domestically, the
homeless, the unemployed, the sick or dying)
http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2014/10/31/what-does-being-european-mean-to-you/#.VHtFJmfUh-w
https://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/european-issues/0466-europe-and-the-identity-challenge-who-are-we
https://e-medine.org/it/cosa-significa-essere-cittadini-europei/
https://yerun.eu/2022/05/europe-and-european-identity-in-todays-world-and-political-climate/
https://www.politico.eu/article/understanding-europes-shift-to-the-right/
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/05/catalonia-independence-more-than-nationalism
http://theglobaljournal.net/article/view/469/
So you could start an essay with:
the idea that the
international community is (mainly) based on nation states (e.g. at the UN or
in the EU) which are based on the idea of national identity (and self-determination)
as a valid idea. Nationality involves a shared identity, usually reinforced by
education, based on some, any, or all of the following:
culture, history,
language, ethnicity (real or perceived, i.e. false ideas about 'race'),
religion, connection with a specific geographical area, an awareness of the
state and affection for it. However, this is often the product of basic
education and can be dangerous since national identities and uncritical
patriotism (jingoism) have been, and still are, a contributory cause of wars between
states. Some historians argue that this is a factor that governments have often
exploited to build support for war (e.g. European history 1700-1945,
particularly the end of the 19th century and World War I/II)
National identity, as indicated above in the quote from Huntington, is of
course only one level of identity that people feel, but a powerful one in terms
of its effect on international relations.
However, the idea
of national identity is also open to challenges both internally and externally.
Internally – almost
every state contains at least one ethnic minority with a strong identity. In
some countries this minority may be a majority within a particular area,
perhaps one which it is linked to historically (French-speaking Quebec).
Smaller groups within a state may assert their own sense of national identity
and aim at a greater degree of autonomy or recognition as a separate culture
(Wales) or national independence (e.g. Scotland, Catalonia). These tensions may
be productive (multiculturalism, with different groups learning from each other
and contributing different things to a society) and contained democratically
(Walloons and Flemings in Belgium), Britain (so far), Canada (so far), Spain
(so far), resolved peacefully by separation (Czechoslovakia, the Czech Republic
and Slovakia) or lead to conflict, secession and the violent break-up of the
state (former Yugoslavia (where between June 1991
and April 1992, four republics declared independence, while only Serbia and
Montenegro remained federated) and the successor states.
Externally – How
does this affect foreign relations? Perhaps we should consider Russian-speaking
minorities in Georgia and Ukraine and Russia’s declared interest in protecting
these groups. Though the comparison is unjust to Russia, we might also consider
Nazi foreign policy in the 1930s and its insistence on ‘defending Germans’
living outside the Reich.
Many, if not most,
of the world’s problems today are global, e.g. environmental challenges,
security threats, economic problems, migration, trade questions, international
crime, medical emergencies etc… States cannot effectively deal with these questions
at a purely national level and as a result cooperate in many areas (the WTO,
the IMF, NATO etc..) and thus, to some extent give up part of their sovereignty
in favor of a wider identity within a responsible, rule-based humane
international community.
The European Union
is the best example of a highly evolved supranational organization where states
cooperate in order to achieve shared goals. Legally we now have shared European
citizenship and new responsibilities for EU diplomats towards all European
citizens, not just to those of their nation state. So a commonly asked question
is ‘To what extent do we now have a genuine European identity and feel
ourselves to be Europeans? After all, thanks to the EU today we have the right
to travel to, reside in and work in any EU member state we choose. In most polls and surveys European citizens
still describe themselves primarily in terms of national identity, and
opposition to the EU institutions has risen recently. However, that opposition
may be largely due to economic difficulties and fears about jobs and rising
non-EU immigration. People want someone to blame and have generally blamed their
national governments as well as the EU institutions.
However, perhaps
we should not confuse the idea of European identity and the EU institutions.
After all, a person may have little respect for his government but still be a
patriot with real affection for his country. Similarly, one could argue that
most Europeans (inside or outside the EU) actually already share an identity as
Europeans, a strong set of shared values and common expectations (with a shared
historical evolution), but may not be consciously aware of it. I would argue
that when we travel around Europe, certainly Western Europe, we no longer have
the sense of being abroad that people in the 1930s or even 1950s would have
felt. We are aware of language differences but we also experience much that is
familiar and shared –democracy, a welfare state, an open society, an
increasingly secular state, common norms and expectations in terms of the rules
governing work and social behavior, the role of women, education, as well as
how we use our free time and the kinds of entertainment we enjoy. Moreover, a
military conflict between, say Italy and Spain, is now inconceivable. Some of
this is no doubt the result of the work done by the EU and programs like
Erasmus, but much is also the product of prosperity, and the opportunities provided
by the advances in transport and communications systems. Where once only the
rich traveled, this possibility is available at very low costs and vast number
of Europeans travel to other European countries for holidays, for work or to study.
# Contrast this with the experience of traveling to many areas outside Europe.
Here we may genuinely experience culture shock. This may take many forms when
we find ourselves confronted with widespread poverty, the lack of basic medical
services, a lack of democracy, clear legal rights and personal security, the
powerful role of religion within some societies and conservative values that to
Europeans may seem 19th century, the lack of a welfare state, and a
lack of political and social debate. This may make us more aware of our
European identity.
Many states today
are multicultural societies and need to find a balance that accommodates
different identities within them. This is not a new phenomenon (the problems of
the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the 19th
century for example). After all, the Jews and the Roma (the gypsies) are
examples of transnational identities with long European histories and the discrimination
they faced (and still face as far as the Roma are concerned) is a lesson for us
today regarding both the need for and the difficulty of achieving real
toleration and acceptance of identities different from that of the majority.
Similarly, the Kurdish question is one of the key questions in assessing
Turkey's application to join the EU.
Today there remains
widespread concern if not actual fear in the West regarding Islamist terrorism,
the reemergence of religion as a transnational force, able to recruit followers
(though statistically few) from among Muslims in Europe and radicalize them in
the name of a religion which exerts a primary claim, above that of any national
state or set of secular values. Islamist terrorists reject the secular state
and Western values and thus also the universal values of the UN, built upon the
equality and dignity of all human beings. They reject equality between Muslims
and non-believers and they often see sectarian divisions too as a basis for
violence e.g. Sunni
or Shia or other groupings
However, according
to French sociologists many of those of Arab origin living as citizens or
residents in France today (around 5.7-6.0 million) are non-practicing Muslims,
just as most of their Catholic counterparts are largely non-practicing
Christians. They argue that most French Arab men and women share the same
European secular values as other French citizens. Radicalized Muslims and
jihadists were estimated at 17,000 by French authorities in 2018 and support
for radical Islamism may be in the tens of thousands, but this is still a small
proportion of the total (and the proportion who actively take part in acts of
violence is much smaller). Moreover, although Islamic radicalism has some
powerful support in the Arab and wider Islamic world, it is far from clear that
radical Islamism has widespread popular support anywhere. Islamic State lost
control of the areas it had in Iraq and Syria and although it remains a
presence there and has spread to other Muslim countries, mainly in Africa, its
ability to gain followers seems to be matched by the way those who come under
its rule do not want to repeat the experience.
Huge numbers (5.4
million registered Syrian refugees and perhaps 6.9 million internally displaced
persons as of January 2023) have fled their homes and it is clear that while many
were fleeing from the Assad government's forces, others after 2014 did not want
to live under a regime such as ISIS.
https://reporting.unhcr.org/syriasituation
http://www.unhcr.org/syria-emergency.html
https://data2.unhcr.org/en/situations/syria
https://www.unhcr.org/sy/internally-displaced-people
At a less violent level
there does seem to be growing tension between those who would like to maintain
and strengthen the purely secular nature of the state (atheists, agnostics and
many religious moderates) and those who wish to see laws to protect religious
belief itself in some way. This is reflected in the more serious debate that
arose about Charlie Hebdo after the events in Paris. It includes issues like
blasphemy, censorship, education and dress, and identity issues like gay rights
(a question of social or individual identity), the protection of, and space given
to minority religious cultures within a national culture and the nature and
exercise of women’s rights.
In fact, gender
identity and the position of women and children in society are other issues
that raise debate both within societies with traditions that place power and
education mainly in the hands of men and between these societies and liberal
democracies. The Nobel Peace Prize (2014) was awarded jointly to Kailash
Satyarthi and Malala Yousafzai "for
their struggle against the suppression of children and young people and for the
right of all children to education" (especially girls). This is an
indication of growing awareness at the international level of this problem.
Individual and social identities and related rights include groups such as the
young, the old, the disabled, the unemployed, the poor, travelers, the
homeless, drop-outs, drug-addicts and HIV/AIDS sufferers for example, all of
whom may be discriminated against on the basis of who they are, or are thought
to be, or the way they live or the danger they are seen as representing.
Beyond all this
there is the concept of universal identity, enshrined in international law and
embedded in the foundations of all the major institutions from the UN down (see
‘The Universal
Declaration of Human Rights’), which sees all human beings – regardless of their
nationality, culture, ethnicity, religion, gender, age, sexual orientation – as
equal and entitled to the protection of their rights as such. This is not a claim
accepted by Islamist extremists or cultural supremacists of other types (e.g. neo-Nazis) but it is the basis of every charity appeal when we
are faced with a natural or man-made disaster, and it is the product of a
struggle going back to the Enlightenment, the American and French Revolutions
and Thomas Paine’s ‘The Rights of Man’.
Empathy, or our ability to identify as human beings with other human beings is
an essential part of our nature and the basis of humanism, humanitarianism and
much of our art. One can also argue that human solidarity requires a growing
awareness of our identity as members of a single human community with
responsibilities towards its weakest members, those in extreme poverty or
caught in violent conflict or the victims of discrimination or persecution, or
refugees from a wide range of humanitarian disasters and, with global
population growth and the human impact on the environment, towards those who
are now called environmental refugees too. (And greater concern for other
species too?). Given the globalized nature of many of humanities challenges
some political commentators argue we are in the process of developing a
'global' identity'.
Finally, there is
the role of the diplomat to consider. A key part of his job is to represent his
country by promoting a positive image of his nation and correcting any negative
perceptions or stereotypes. This means molding how an identity is seen by
projecting a particular image through cultural and economic diplomacy as well
as diplomacy in its narrower political sense. It also means that the diplomat
must demonstrate an interest in and a respect for other cultures and
identities.
European identity - unity in diversity? http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/585921/IPOL_STU(2017)585921_EN.pdf
https://www.thenewfederalist.eu/european-identity-diversity-into-a-form-of-unity?lang=fr
# Personal
view– Modern multiculturalism has a history which has become a growing part of
our education system. Where once schools had a program of studies that emphasized
the nation and its achievements, the last 50 years have seen a growing trend
towards a ‘European’, and more recently towards a ‘global’ view. Who today
would deny that any serious academic program in a European country about
classical music, art history and, above all, the history of science would have to
be European-based and would make little sense in purely national terms? Mozart,
Beethoven, Leonardo da Vinci, Van Gogh, Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Copernicus,
Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Fermi, all of these people may or may not have
thought of themselves in nationalist terms but were clearly open to ideas at a
European level and contributed at that level. I would argue that it is not very
useful to think of Shakespeare as essentially English, while his roots as a
European are very clear. In the same way, I would argue that thinking of Mozart
as an Austrian is very limiting and I feel he belongs as much to me, someone
British living in Italy, as he does to an Austrian. I would also argue that
this is instinctively what Europeans feel today. Put Shakespeare or Jane Austen
into modern dress in a film, dub the film into Italian and I don’t think most
Italians will feel they are watching something fundamentally foreign, though
they will recognize it as not contemporary. Put it into a modern setting and
even this barrier disappears. Of course, this kind of shared cultural heritage
can become multicultural. Here is an entertaining Bollywood adaptation of Jane
Austen!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53W6yV7i5zo&list=PLySYrn1mG-gAK6h_7HNitoD1oVBDGbYly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VlUWfMS69M
also
interesting:
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento
Nota. Solo i membri di questo blog possono postare un commento.