This issue, our fourth issue of pariss, marks a turning point in the short life of the journal and an opportunity to take stock. The launch of the journal back in summer 2020 happened to coincide with an exceptional interruption in the normal functioning of work, education, and movement across borders. Though it was of course not our intention to launch a new publication at the start of a global pandemic, setting pariss in motion during this time undoubtedly shaped the contours of the journal. Bringing to the forefront the continuities between the exercise of emergency
In this paper I complicate the boundaries of fieldwork by grappling with my academic and personal investment in the histories of conflict in Northern Ireland. Counter to rationalist assumptions that envision fieldwork as an accumulative acquiring of knowingness, it is often through affective mechanisms that we begin to sense the constellations of longings, emotions and lived experiences that endure through conflict. Aesthetic narratives such as novels are a powerful medium that can activate such sensibility. Thinking with feminist and other critical ir interventions, I reflect on sensing the unbearable lightness of the Troubles through a reading of the novel Milkman by Anna Burns. I propose reading as a fieldwork practice that, by dabbling with affect and disrupting neat boundaries between the field, the data and the analysis, can disclose alternative ways of knowing, allowing us to (momentarily) become more fluent in the everyday affective grammar of/in conflict.
The Global War on Terror has killed or harmed far more innocent people than “terrorism” over the last twenty years. This observation has led some critical scholars to reverse the mainstream question on political violence. Instead of asking how and why some people become “terrorists”, they analyse how the violence of the Global War on Terror has been produced and reproduced. This article contributes to this critical scholarship by investigating two cases: first, the “enhanced interrogation” policy implemented by the Bush administration and, second, French aerial bombings in Afghanistan and Mali. Despite their numerous differences, these warlike counter-”terrorist” practices have one thing in common: their partisans and operatives tend to fetishize the question of intentionality. They claim that counter-”terrorism” remains more moral than “terrorism”—regardless of the aforementioned death toll—because counter-”terrorist” forces do not specifically intend to kill or harm innocent people. I analyse this claim as a “frame of war” in Judith Butler’s sense - i.e. as a regime of knowledge which normalizes a particular violence -, and I document its social construction.
Scholarship has often compartmentalised issues associated with injustice, political violence, and past wrongdoings. To contextualise questions of political change and justice across time and space, we introduce a dynamic, layered and transversal understanding of these processes. Drawing on Inés Valdez’s notion of “justice as a political craft,” we explore situated struggles for change and justice. Coping with injustice is contingent on context-specific conceptual and practical understandings of justice and grounded in particular experiences. Drawing on symbolic sites—the Uprising, the Audience, the Body, the Affect, the Island, and the Map—we highlight a variety of struggles against past, present and future injustices. Struggles for political change arise out of expanding, sometimes exploding, transitional justice knowledge(s). Claims to (in)justice are being made and received in different physical and symbolic sites. We lay out a framework of justicecraft to capture these intricacies, drawing on different conceptual lenses and empirical illustrations.
Drawing on the Foucauldian theoretical concepts of governmentality and genealogy as a method for grasping the unconventional reality of multiculturalism discourse in South Korea, this paper aims to go beyond ahistorical accounts of multicultural policy. The article offers an analysis of policy discourses relating to multicultural families in South Korea, and it examines the strategies utilized by the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family to maintain and expand its ministerial jurisdiction. Such analyses reveal how policy discourse has shifted away from Korean blood-based ethnicity and the “mixed-blood” category of people in favor of focusing on female marriage migrants and their families. Furthermore, the examination highlights how legislation that supports these families conceptualizes female migrants as apolitical, family-oriented, and maternal beings. This conceptualization is legitimized by the ministerial strategies adopted by “femocrats,” government officials affiliated with the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family.
This study attempted to examine to what extent hybrid peacebuilding would be applicable in Xinjiang’s ethnic conflict between the Han and Uighurs. After situating hybrid peacebuilding within the liberal peacebuilding literature, for further contextualization, the study then extrapolated key information from several other Asian cases of hybrid peacebuilding. It then overviewed the conflict (the parties involved and their various perspectives), outlined the modern efforts to resolve the conflict, and determined how they remain problematic. Finally, the study qualitatively analyzed the theoretical applicability of hybrid peacebuilding, its potential benefits, and potential drawbacks. The study concluded that hybrid peacebuilding has theoretical potential in Xinjiang, especially in the future, but its current drawbacks hinder its chances of success.
Thailand–China relations have often been described metaphorically as fraternal, signifying the special place China has in Thai foreign policy. However, Sino–Thai brotherly friendship is an illusion. Based on archival evidence recently made available in Bangkok, this study provides a new account of Thailand’s relations with China in the 1990s, usually described by scholars as the period of partnership. This study argues that during this period, Thai foreign policy vis-a-vis China was almost exclusively driven by the Kingdom’s national interests, framed by its consistent diplomatic mentality over time. Specifically, the primacy of national interest was a modus operandi of Thailand’s China policy. Notably, Bangkok policymakers viewed China’s expanding role and influence in mainland Southeast Asia and throughout Asia as a long-term threat to the Kingdom’s security. Thus, ironically, China and Thailand might not be termed brothers but possibly in a distant fraternal relationship that some might categorize as “others.”
This article applies a new conflict resolution theory – False Readiness (FR) – to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and offers a theory-based explanation of the numerous failures to resolve it. The FR theory was designed to facilitate research on protracted conflicts where the parties agree to open negotiations, conduct rounds for decades, but fail to reach peace agreements. It suggests that when at least one of the disputants does not seek resolution, no agreement can be achieved. Based on the FR theory, this article concludes that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the widely recognized sole representative of the Palestinians, behaved as an FR actor in negotiations with Israel. Ample empirical evidence demonstrates that this conduct is rooted in historical factors, ideological positions, and strategic policies adopted with little change since the establishment of the PLO in 1964. A similar application to the Israeli side may yield similar results.