Top Banner
Colm Campbell Transitional Justice Institute (UU)
12

Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Feb 25, 2016

Download

Documents

Moira

Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention. Colm Campbell Transitional Justice Institute (UU). Transitional Justice: Gaps. Armed Opposition movements… Subjects rather than merely objects Agency & entrepreneurship - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Colm CampbellTransitional Justice Institute (UU)

Page 2: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Transitional Justice: GapsArmed Opposition movements…

Subjects rather than merely objects Agency & entrepreneurship

…as social movementsMobilising structuresPolitical opportunity structureFraming processes

Victims and perpetratorsDichotomous: victim or perpetratorDyadic: victim and perpetrator

Page 3: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Mobilising StructuresBi-furcated (typically)

PartyArmed entity

ANC & MK, Fatah (PLO) &Tanzim, ETA &BatasunaDemobilisation of armed entity (DDR)Party mobilisationRelationship of one to the other?

Splits and flanking threats

Page 4: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Peace Process: Political Opportunity StructureRoute to political powerNew alliancesDamage enemies and opponentsEntrepreneurshipFlanking threats

Page 5: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Framing ProcessesFrame resonance: targets of mobilizationFrame bridging: making new alliancesFraming and entrepreneurshipCompromise: diagnostic & prognosticFraming battles:

The stateOpponentsPotential flankers

Page 6: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

‘The Past’ as opportunity and riskTruth processes as battlegrounds (SATRC)Framing battle: whose version resonates?Political opportunities: damage enemies and

opponentsvictim-perpetrator dyads

Self-investigationApology ()

Space for flankers?

Page 7: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

NI’s past as framing battleIs there a ‘past’?Whose story resonates?How to get there? (inquiries, truth etc.)In the past, nobody won; can battle over past

be won now?

Page 8: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Bloody Sunday TribunalResonance of findingsCameron’s apology-apologiaWithout a truth commission, what’s the NI

story?Depriving flankers (diagnostic-prognostic

framing)

Page 9: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Entrepreneurship:‘no return to Stormont’11 UK-imposed obstacle to Irish reunification

(‘occupation’ frame). 12 symbol of discrimination (‘injustice’ frame)13 geographical site

Page 10: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Apology-apologia(2002) IRA: ‘It is therefore appropriate… that

we address all of the deaths… of non-combatants caused by us. We offer our sincere apologies and condolences to their families

Apology-aplogia (‘combatant’ language)

Page 11: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

Kicking to touch? - Truth/legacy commission? Bradley-Eames processDemanding UN involvement?Amnesty for truth?

Page 12: Flanking Threats and Framing Battles: Peace Processes, Social Movements and the Politics of Contention

ConclusionsPolitical opportunities effectively exploitedDemobilisation and party mobilisation well

handledFraming battles – variable Victim-perpetrator dyadic