de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean

Post

 
 Vis
  Bør man skelne mellem 'de onde' og 'de gode'?
Item is

Ophav

 Ophav:
Hansen, Christina1, Forfatter
Berling, Trine Villumsen2, Vejleder
Tilknytninger:
1Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet, Københavns Universitet, København, Danmark, diskurs:7001              
2Institut for Statskundskab, Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet, Københavns Universitet, København, Danmark, diskurs:7003              
skjul Ophav
Vis Ophav

Indhold

Ukontrollerede emneord: Sikkerhedsliggørelse, Elfenbenskysten, voldelig konflikt
 Abstract: Until a coup d'état in 1999 and a violent conflict from 2002 to 2011, Côte d'Ivoire had been a peaceful country in the otherwise unstable West African region. In this thesis I seek to explore how this sudden change from a peaceful situation to a protracted violent conflict happened. Moreover, the violent conflict was resolved in a manner that has been described as a "winner-takes-all"-solution. Therefore I also seek to explore whether this solution contributed to peace and stability or, on the contrary, contributed to continuing unrest and instability.
In order to examine if a changed discourse – as often argued by the academic literature on the violent conflict in Côte d'Ivoire – was one of the factors that made the protracted violent conflict possible, I use the securitization theory of the Copenhagen School of Security Studies to examine whether any securitizing moves or successful securitizations can be identified, as successful securitizations may have been part of the mechanisms that made the protracted violent conflict possible. Securitization theory is also used to examine whether the securitized issues were subsequently desecuritized.
In order to ensure a coherent understanding of the connection between phases of conflict and securitization theory, conflict theory is introduced to develop a definition of conflict that is compatible with the (social) constructivist nature of securitization theory.
The analysis is divided into three parts – before the violent conflict, during the violent conflict, and after the violent conflict – and the analysis is carried out as discourse analysis on the basis of analytical categories from securitization theory. From the analysis, it is evident that several actors successfully securitized a number of issues both in the period leading up to the violent conflict and during the violent conflict. These securitizations are therefore seen as mechanisms that made the protracted violent conflict possible.
The analysis also shows that the successful securitizations were not successfully desecuritized subsequently. This may have impeded the transition to peace and stability. Finally, the analysis also shows that the international community has reproduced a discourse of 'the good' and 'the evil' that hinders a successful desecuritization. On the basis of the lack of desecuritization, I point to a number of components that could help ensure a successful desecuritization.
skjul Indhold
Vis Indhold

Filer

Navn:
Bør.pdf (Hovedtekst)
Bemærkninger:
-
Tilgængelighed:
Offentlig
Mime-type / størrelse:
application/pdf / 2MB
Copyright dato:
2014-05-08
Copyright information:
De fulde rettigheder til dette materiale tilhører forfatteren.
skjul Filer
Vis Filer

Basal

Bogmærk denne post: https://diskurs.kb.dk/item/diskurs:59629:1
 Type: Speciale
Alternativ titel: - En sikkerhedsliggørelsesanalyse af de diskurser, der muliggjorde den voldelige konflikt i Elfenbenskysten og besværliggjorde dens afslutning
Alternativ titel: Should we distinguish between 'the evil' and 'the good'?
Alternativ titel: - A securitization analysis of the discourses that made the violent conflict in Côte d'Ivoire possible and hindered its end
skjul Basal
Vis Basal

Links

Vis Links

Detaljer

Sprog: Danish - dan
 Datoer: 2013-09-02
 Sider: -
 Publiceringsinfo: København : Københavns Universitet
 Indholdsfortegnelse: 1 Indledning . 1
1.1 Problemformulering . 3
1.2. Operationalisering 4
1.3 Videnskabsteoretisk udgangspunkt 5
2 Teori 7
2.1 Teoretisk baggrund: Socialkonstruktivisme 7
2.2 Sikkerhedsliggørelsesteori . 9
2.3 Konfliktteori: Definition af ”konflikt” . 12
2.4 Konfliktfaser og sikkerhedsliggørelsesspektret 15
2.5 Opsummering 18
3 Analysestrategi 19
3.1 Analysestrategiske valg og operationalisering . 19
3.2 Elfenbenskysten: Afgrænsning og begrænsninger. 25
3.3 Kilder 26
3.4 Min rolle. 30
3.5 Opsummering 31
4 Elfenbenskysten: Baggrund . 32
4.1 Politisk kontekst. 32
4.2 Etno-religiøs kontekst 33
5 Analyse 36
5.1 Analyse af perioden januar 1994 til september 2002: Før den voldelige konflikt 36
5.1.1 Et referentobjekt 36
5.1.2 En eksistentiel trussel 42
5.1.3 Ekstraordinære midler 44
5.1.4 Publikums accept . 46
5.1.5 Opsummering 47
5.2 Analyse af perioden september 2002 til april 2011: Voldelig konflikt 49
5.2.1 Et referentobjekt 50
5.2.2 En eksistentiel trussel 54
5.2.3 Ekstraordinære midler 57
5.2.4 Publikums accept . 59
5.2.5 Afsikkerhedsliggørelse? 61
5.2.6 Opsummering 65
5.3 Analyse af perioden maj 2011 til juni 2013: Efter den voldelige konflikt(?) . 69
5.3.1 Afsikkerhedsliggørelse? 70
5.3.2 En løst konflikt? 75
5.3.3 Manglende elementer for en succesfuld afsikkerhedsliggørelse . 77
5.3.4 Opsummering 78
5.4 Samlet opsummering på analysen . 80
6 Konklusion. 84
7 Perspektivering . 87
8 Litteratur 89
Bilag . 101
Bilag 1: Liste over forkortelser 101
Figurer og tabeller
Figur 2.2.1: Spektrum for politisering og sikkerhedsliggørelse 10
Figur 2.2.2: Spektrum for politisering og sikkerhedsliggørelse med afsikkerhedsliggørelse . 12
Tabel 2.3.1: Tre definitioner af konflikt 12
Tabel 2.3.2: Forskelle imellem de tre definitioner af konflikt 13
Figur 2.4.1: Specialets forståelse af sammenhængen mellem konflikt og sikkerhedsliggørelse 16
Figur 2.4.2: Den ivorianske konflikt og specialets forståelse af konflikt og sikkerhedsliggørelse 17
Figur 3.1.1: Lene Hansens metodiske model for en diskursanalyse (Hansen 2006: 81). 20
Figur 3.1.2: Specialets analysestrategi i Lene Hansens model . 22
Figur 3.1.3: Fremkomsten af de fire analysekategorier til sikkerhedsliggørelsesanalyse 24
Figur 3.1.4: Afsikkerhedsliggørelsesanalyse . 25
Figur 3.3.1: Tidslinje til brug for valg af kilder . 28
Tabel 4.1.1: Præsidenter i Elfenbenskysten i specialets periode 33
Tabel 4.2.1: De ledende politiske aktørers etniske tilhørsforhold . 35
Tabel 5.1.5.1: Sikkerhedsliggørelser i perioden 1994-2002 48
Tabel 5.2.6.1: Sikkerhedsliggørelser i perioden september 2002 – april 2011 66
Tabel 5.4.1: Opsummering af sikkerhedsliggørelserne i 1994-2002 og 2002-2011 82
 Note: -
 Type: Speciale
skjul Detaljer
Vis Detaljer

Kilde

Vis Kilde