Search

Begin New Search Topic Social Movement Political Geography Europe

11. Donor Assistance in the Transparency and Accountability Movement

Author:
Davin O'Regan
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
Focusing on transparency and anti-corruption issues, this report discusses the findings from a series of participatory workshops and more than seventy interviews with social movement actors and organizations in Kenya, Nigeria, and Ukraine. It looks at the different ways social movement actors in these countries were influenced by foreign financial support and training, including in terms of the goals they set, the tactics and activities they pursue, and whether receiving foreign support compromises their legitimacy with their domestic constituents.
Topic:
Corruption, Social Movement, Accountability, and Transparency
Political Geography:
Kenya, Africa, Europe, Ukraine, and Nigeria

12. What Can Protest Achieve?: The Case of the Fossil Fuel Divestment Campaign

Author:
Carl Death
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
Can protest really make a difference? Can social movements change any- thing? Do campaigns like those for fossil fuel divestment rapidly snowballing across campuses, cities, churches, and institutional investors in North America, Europe, and elsewhere have any real impact on global political economies of energy? This article argues that the answer to all of these questions is a qualified “yes.” The fossil fuel divestment campaign is a specific manifestation of environ- mental protest, which, since emerging in 2011, has changed some things and has the potential to change others more profoundly.1 Considering the case of the fossil fuel divestment campaign in detail can illuminate important insights about the role of protest in contemporary global politics. Protest movements can impact the world, as evidenced by both the fossil fuel divestment campaign and longer histories of other divestment movements that have contributed to significant struggles for structural change.
Topic:
Climate Change, Social Movement, Protests, Fossil Fuels, and Divestment
Political Geography:
Europe and North America

13. Referendums in Europe: People Power or Device of the Political Elite?

Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Mile End Institute, Queen Mary University of London
Abstract:
Based on the findings of her recent book ‘The Politics of Referendum Use in European Democracies’, Dr. Saskia Hollander debates the strategic use of referendums in Europe.
Topic:
Politics, Social Movement, Referendum, and Elites
Political Geography:
Europe

14. Why It Matters What We Do: Arab Citizens' Perceptions of the European Union after the 2011 Uprisings

Author:
Kressen Thyen
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Abstract:
In the Middle East and North Africa, EU foreign policy has tended to prioritise regime stability over democratisation. Existing research has argued that this could create anti‐European sentiment in the respective populations. However, empirical evidence on the relationship between the EU’s stance towards regime change and citizen attitudes remains rare. Focusing on Morocco and Egypt, this study uses a mixed‐methods approach, combining qualitative case studies with original survey data to examine whether the EU’s divergent responses to the 2011 uprisings in these two countries are mirrored in regime opponents’ support for EU cooperation.
Topic:
Social Movement, European Union, Democracy, Arab Spring, and Protests
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, Egypt, and Morocco

15. Comparing the Governance of Islam in Turkey and Indonesia: Diyanet and the Ministry of Religious Affairs

Author:
Martin van Bruinessen
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Abstract:
In spite of their overwhelmingly Muslim populations, Indonesia and Turkey are formally secular states though of different kind. However, both allocate a surprisingly high proportion of the state budget to the administration of Islam, considerably higher than most countries where Islam is the state religion. In Turkey during the years 1950-2000 and in Indonesia during the New Order period (1966-1998), the state invested heavily in the education of “enlightened” religious personnel and the dissemination of religious views that were compatible with the drive for modernisation and development. Turkey’s Directorate for Religious Affairs (Diyanet) controls a huge bureaucracy through which the state interacts with the pious conservative part of the population. Schools for the training of prayer leaders addressed the needs of the same segment of the population and were intended to facilitate the integration of these conservatives into the project of secular modernisation. However, these institutions had the unforeseen effect of enabling the social mobility of once marginalised conservatives, allowing them to gradually gain control of part of the state apparatus. Mutatis mutandis, very similar developments can be observed in Indonesia, where the Ministry of Religious Affairs (MORA) and the Council of Islamic Scholars (MUI) were expected to provide development-friendly religious guidance and prevent undesirable expressions of religiosity. After the fall of the Suharto regime, the MUI made itself independent of the government and instead became a vehicle through which various conservative religious groups strove to influence government policies, with various degrees of success.
Topic:
Islam, Religion, Social Movement, Secularism, and Modernization
Political Geography:
Europe, Indonesia, Turkey, and Asia

16. Europe’s Populist Challenge

Author:
Matt Browne, Dalibor Rohac, and Carolyn Kenney
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Authoritarian populism is not new to Europe. Numerous political parties on the far right and the far left have long called for a radical overhaul of Europe’s political and economic institutions. What is new is that, in the past decade, such parties have moved from the margins of Europe’s political landscape to its core. As the historic memories of World War II and Soviet communism fade, so has the social stigma previously associated with advocating for policy agendas that destroy democratic institutions and human lives. What is more, the parties themselves have undergone dramatic changes and spurred a wave of political innovation. New populist movements have emerged, defying old ideological categories. Old populist groups have changed too, sometimes dramatically. Instead of stale ideological proselytizing, populists now offer excitement and rebellion—and use cutting-edge social media strategies to do so. Although populism and authoritarianism are conceptually separate, they often go together in practice. After the global economic downturn of 2008, the vote share of authoritarian populist parties in Europe increased dramatically. Elections have ushered such parties into government—most notably in Hungary and Poland—providing the first real-world indications of how modern authoritarian populists behave when in power. The record is not encouraging. In each country affected, checks and balances and the judiciary have been weakened, and governments have sought to silence opposition voices in media and civil society. The changing political landscape has also prompted a response from mainstream politicians. Some have tried to use elements of populist political messaging to capture the segments of the electorate disenchanted with conventional center-left and center-right politics. Others have tried to imitate the appeal of populists by adopting their substantive promises on immigration, the economy, and national sovereignty. This report examines the drivers of populist support, focusing first on the current state of play before endeavoring to understand the reasons for populism’s resurgence in Europe. It then offers a series of policy recommendations that policymakers can use to fight back. Although the jury is still out on which political strategies work in which contexts, reconnecting European voters with mainstream politics is a critical part of addressing the challenge that authoritarian populism poses. The report was inspired by conversations with academics, strategists, and policymakers, which were held in early 2018 at workshops convened jointly by the Center for American Progress (CAP) and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) in Florence and Prague under the auspices of our common project, “Defending Democracy and Underwriting the Transatlantic Partnership.”
Topic:
Social Movement, Democracy, Populism, and Protests
Political Geography:
Europe

17. 10 Things to Watch for on Brexit

Author:
Ken Gude
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
On December 11, British Parliament will vote on Prime Minister Theresa May’s deal to leave the European Union (EU)—commonly known as Brexit. As of now, it seems clear that she is nowhere close to having the votes to pass it.1 The vote comes after a contentious referendum campaign in the United Kingdom and two years of difficult negotiations with the EU, which saw Prime Minister May and Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, formally agree on a Brexit withdrawal agreement on November 25.2 The deal would establish a transition period at least through the end of 2020, during which the United Kingdom would be formally outside the EU but still abiding by its rules and regulations.3 During this transition period, U.K. and EU leadership will negotiate the final terms of the future economic and trading relationship that will see the United Kingdom leave the EU single market and formal customs union yet likely remain in close alignment with the EU on many customs rules.4 If the United Kingdom does remain close to EU customs rules, it would limit the scope of any free trade deals the nation wants with non-EU countries that diverge from EU customs requirements.5 Furthermore, it would allow the United Kingdom to place new limits on the previously free movement of EU nationals into the nation.6 May’s Conservative Party is in the unenviable position of not having enough members of Parliament (MPs) to form an overall majority and, in order to form a government, it relies on an agreement with 10 MPs from the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) to vote with them on important legislation.7 Yet the DUP opposes the withdrawal deal, as do many of May’s own Tory MPs.8 And then there is Britain’s main opposition, the Labour Party, which is against the deal, as is the third-largest party in Parliament, the Scottish National Party (SNP).9 The reality is that there still is no political consensus in the United Kingdom between the mutually exclusive positions of those who want a hard Brexit and a sharp break from the EU, a soft Brexit that maintains close alignment with the EU, and no Brexit at all.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Social Movement, European Union, Brexit, and Regionalism
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

18. Formation of Kurdish Nationalist Movement in Turkey: From Social Movement Theories Perspective

Author:
Rahman Dag
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development
Institution:
Centre for Strategic Research and Analysis (CESRAN)
Abstract:
Current politics in Turkey proves that the roots of the Kurdish question have to be taken under strict examination in order to diagnose the problem so that a permanent solution might be found. With this in mind, this paper tries to explain the emergence of the pro-Kurdish nationalist movement, the PKK, via social movement theories. What makes this paper significant is that it examines the process of emergence in three phases via three different social movement theories. For Turkey’s single party era (1923-1950), relative deprivation theory is applied. In the second phase, political opportunity theory is matched with the onset of the multi-party system under the rule of the Democrat Party (1950-1960). Finally resource mobilization theory is applied to the time period between 1960 and 1980. In general, the theoretical approaches chosen are selected in accordance with certain socio-political realities of Turkey. This helps to explain how an ethnic minority ended up with a socially – but not legally – representative organization when they are relatively deprived and obstructed politically. If not all, a certain amount of mobilization of the Kurdish people could result in a social movement, be it is legal or illegal.
Topic:
Nationalism, Social Movement, Minorities, and Community
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

19. Russia’s 5th Column

Author:
Ken Gude
Publication Date:
03-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Russia’s actions to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election and help then-presidential candidate Donald Trump win were similar to its activities to build a network of far-right political parties and movements in Europe. Russian President Vladimir Putin is using this network to advance his policy objectives at home and abroad. In this effort, Russia is motivated by both the desire to lead a conservative revival against Western liberal democracies and a flawed interpretation of recent waves of popular uprisings against autocratic rulers that sees an American conspiracy behind them. Putin has adopted a deliberate strategy to directly challenge the liberal international order led by the United States. That global system helped end the historical pattern of devastating wars among major powers and brought much of the world an unprecedented era of peace and prosperity since the end of World War II.
Topic:
Corruption, Social Movement, Leadership, Far Right, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, North America, and United States of America

20. Turkey’s Digital Divides

Author:
Max Hoffman
Publication Date:
06-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Turkey is emblematic of the promise of the digital revolution that is now sweeping through similarly emerging middle-income democracies around the world. Yet its approach to expanding internet penetration is shaped by its own set of political and social conditions. Wider internet access and use could contribute to a more dynamic Turkish economy that is driven by greater online competition and entrepreneurship. Turkey could likewise provide more efficient, responsive government services to more of its citizens by harnessing information and telecommunications technologies. But the efforts to reap these rewards are hindered by wide disparities in internet access and online literacy, as well as by very different customs that divide men and women, the old and the young, and urban and rural citizens. These divides are evident in the nation’s digital disparities and have roots in the country’s recent political history and social norms. At first glance, Turkey’s rapid but uneven economic development over the past several decades—with all of the accompanying social fissures—is akin to the experiences of other developing nations such as Albania, Chile, or Brazil. And Turkey, like other emerging middle-income democracies, is grappling with the need to privatize the internet and communications industries, which are often powerful political players with deep ties to ruling parties and with little interest in fostering serious online competition. But Turkey’s challenge of providing more internet accessibility at more affordable prices—a key step to becoming a full-fledged developed democratic nation and a new member of the European Union—faces obstacles that are particular to Turkey’s political economy. The ruling Justice and Development Party—more commonly referred to by its Turkish acronym, AKP—must calculate the political gains and losses of more widespread internet access, particularly for those conservative working-class rural voters who are the backbone of its political strength.
Topic:
Social Movement, Democracy, Internet, and Digital Revolution
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia