Non-Dominant Groups in Kosovo: A Marginalised View on (De)Securitisation of Minorities After Conflict

Marius-Ionut Calu
{"title":"Non-Dominant Groups in Kosovo: A Marginalised View on (De)Securitisation of Minorities After Conflict","authors":"Marius-Ionut Calu","doi":"10.53779/dkio0088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on case studies and in-depth analysis of ethnic minorities in Kosovo against the backdrop of statebuilding since 1999, this article discusses how the securitisation and desecuritisation of minorities after conflict is particularly problematic when seen from the marginalised perspective of non-dominant groups. I therefore argue that the adoption of a multi-ethnic statebuilding model of governance, including consociational power-sharing arrangements, has triggered unintended consequences for the (de)securitisation of minorities in Kosovo. Among such consequences is the risk of perceiving all minorities as potential threats and approaching minority issues merely through the lenses of security. By exploring various social, economic, legal, political, and identity characteristics of non-dominant communities in Kosovo and drawing on personal interviews with key stakeholders, representatives, and members of minority communities, this article shows the need for a more inclusive understanding of security which stretches beyond the threat of physical violence. This would permit, among other things, a more effective approach to dealing with the different layers of securitisation of minorities identified here. Otherwise, minority rights and concerns cannot escape the straitjacket of emergency politics. In conclusion, the long-term risk of managing multi-ethnicity through one-size-fits-all approaches is that statebuilding in plural societies will always struggle to desecuritise minority rights and develop ‘normal’ politics of diversity.","PeriodicalId":407952,"journal":{"name":"Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53779/dkio0088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Drawing on case studies and in-depth analysis of ethnic minorities in Kosovo against the backdrop of statebuilding since 1999, this article discusses how the securitisation and desecuritisation of minorities after conflict is particularly problematic when seen from the marginalised perspective of non-dominant groups. I therefore argue that the adoption of a multi-ethnic statebuilding model of governance, including consociational power-sharing arrangements, has triggered unintended consequences for the (de)securitisation of minorities in Kosovo. Among such consequences is the risk of perceiving all minorities as potential threats and approaching minority issues merely through the lenses of security. By exploring various social, economic, legal, political, and identity characteristics of non-dominant communities in Kosovo and drawing on personal interviews with key stakeholders, representatives, and members of minority communities, this article shows the need for a more inclusive understanding of security which stretches beyond the threat of physical violence. This would permit, among other things, a more effective approach to dealing with the different layers of securitisation of minorities identified here. Otherwise, minority rights and concerns cannot escape the straitjacket of emergency politics. In conclusion, the long-term risk of managing multi-ethnicity through one-size-fits-all approaches is that statebuilding in plural societies will always struggle to desecuritise minority rights and develop ‘normal’ politics of diversity.
科索沃非主导群体:冲突后少数群体(去)证券化的边缘化观点
本文通过对1999年以来科索沃国家建设背景下少数民族的案例研究和深入分析,讨论了从非主流群体的边缘化角度来看,冲突后少数民族的证券化和非证券化是如何特别成问题的。因此,我认为,采用多民族国家治理模式,包括联合权力分享安排,已经引发了科索沃少数民族(非)证券化的意想不到的后果。这些后果之一是把所有少数群体视为潜在威胁,只从安全的角度来处理少数群体问题。通过探索科索沃非主流社区的各种社会、经济、法律、政治和身份特征,并通过对主要利益相关者、代表和少数民族社区成员的个人访谈,本文表明,需要对安全有一个更包容的理解,而不仅仅是身体暴力的威胁。除其他事项外,这将允许一种更有效的方法来处理本文所述的不同层次的少数族裔证券化。否则,少数人的权利和关切无法逃脱紧急政治的束缚。总之,通过一刀切的方法来管理多民族的长期风险是,在多元社会中建立国家将始终难以使少数民族权利非安全化,并发展“正常”的多样性政治。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信