@article{BindenagelŠehović2020,
  author    = {Bindenagel Šehović, Annamarie},
  title     = {Towards a new definition of health security},
  series = {Global public health : an international journal for research, policy and practice},
  volume    = {15},
  journal   = {Global public health : an international journal for research, policy and practice},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon, Oxfordshire},
  issn      = {1744-1692},
  doi       = {10.1080/17441692.2019.1634119},
  pages     = {1 -- 12},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {In recent years the framings of global health security have shifted while the structures governing global health have largely remained the same. One feature of the emerging re-ordering is the unresolved allocation of accountability between state and non-state actors. This brings to critical challenges to global health security to the fore. The first is that the consensus on the seeming shift from state to human security framing with regard to the global human right to health (security) risks losing its salience. Second, this conceptual challenge is mirrored on the operational level: if states and non-state actors do not assume responsibility for health security, who or what can guarantee health security? In order to address global health security against the backdrop of these twenty-first Century challenges, this article proceeds in three parts. First, it analyses the shortcomings of the current state-based World Health Organization (WHO) definition of health security. Second, taking into account the rising pressures posed to global health security and the inadequacy both of state-based and of ad hoc non-state responses, it proposes a new framing. Third, the article offers initial insights into the operational application of beyond state responses to (health) security challenges.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Burkert2022,
  author    = {Burkert, Rebecca},
  title     = {Struggle for existence},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-54293},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-542937},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {XII, 239},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {In this project, I sought to understand how Palestinian claim-making in the West Bank is possible within the context of continuing Israeli occupation and repression by the Palestinian political leadership. I explored the questions of what channels non-state actors use to advance their claims, what opportunities they have for making these claims, and what challenges they face. This exploration covers the time period from the Oslo Accords in the mid-1990s to the so-called Great March of Return in 2018. I demonstrated that Palestinians used different modes and strategies of resistance in the past century, as the area of what today is Israel/Palestine has historically been a target for foreign penetration. Yet, the Oslo agreements between the Israeli government and the Palestinian leadership have ended Palestinians' decentralized and pluralist social governance, reinforced Israeli rule in the Palestinian territories, promoted continuing dispossession and segregation of Palestinians, and further restricted their rights and their claim-making opportunities until this day. Therefore, today, Palestinian society in the West Bank is characterized by fragmentation, geographical and societal segregation, and double repression by Israeli occupation and Palestinian Authority (PA) policies. What is more, Palestinian claim-making is legally curtailed due to the establishment of different geographical entities in which Palestinians are subjugated to different forms of Israeli rule and regulations. I argue that the concepts of civil society and acts of citizenship, which are often used to describe non-state actors' rights-seeking activities, fall short on understanding and describing Palestinian claim-making in the West Bank comprehensively. By determining their boundaries, the concept of acts of subjecthood evolved as a novel theoretical approach within the research process and as a means of claim-making within repressive contexts where claim makers' rights are curtailed and opportunities for rights-seeking activities are few. Thereby, this study applies a new theoretical framework to the conflict in Israel/Palestine and contributes to a better understanding of rights-seeking activities within the West Bank. Further, I argue that Palestinian acts of subjecthood against hostile Israeli rule in the West Bank are embedded within the comprehensive structure of settler colonialism. As a form of colonialism that aims at replacing an indigenous population, Israeli settler colonialism in the West Bank manifests itself in restrictions of Palestinian movement, settlement constructions, home demolitions, violence, and detentions. By using grounded theory and inductive reasoning as methodological approaches, I was able to make generalizations about the state of Palestinian claim-making. These generalizations are based on the analysis of secondary materials and data collected via face-to-face and video interviews with non-state actors in Israel/Palestine. The conducted research shows that there is not a single measure or a standalone condition that hinders Palestinian claim-making, but a complex and comprehensive structure that, on the one hand, shrinks Palestinian living space by occupation and destruction and, on the other hand, diminishes Palestinian civic space by limiting the fundamental rights to organize and build social movements to change the status Palestinians live in. Although the concrete, tangible outcomes of Palestinian acts of subjecthood are marginal, they contribute to strengthening and perpetuating Palestinian's long history of resistance against Israeli oppression. With a lack of adherence to international law, the neglect of UN resolutions by the Israeli government, the continuous defeats of rights organizations in Israeli courts, and the repression of institutions based in the West Bank by PA and occupation policies, Palestinian acts of subjecthood cannot overturn current power structures. Nevertheless, the ongoing persistence of non-state actors claiming rights, as well as the pop-up of new initiatives and youth movements are all essential for strengthening Palestinians' resilience and documenting current injustices. Therefore, they can build the pillars for social change in the future. Das Ziel der vorliegenden Dissertation war es zu untersuchen, wie pal{\"a}stinensisches claim-making, also die Artikulation von Forderungen bzw. die Geltendmachung von bestimmten Rechten, vor dem Hintergrund der anhaltenden israelischen Besatzung und Repressalien durch die pal{\"a}stinensische politische F{\"u}hrung im Westjordanland durchgesetzt werden kann. Dabei soll der Frage nachgegangen werden, welche Kan{\"a}le nichtstaatliche Akteure nutzen, um ihre Anspr{\"u}che geltend zu machen, welche M{\"o}glichkeiten sich ihnen daf{\"u}r bieten und vor welchen Herausforderungen sie stehen. Der Untersuchungszeitraum erstreckt sich dabei vom Osloer Friedensprozess Mitte der 1990er Jahre bis hin zum sogenannten Great March of Return im Jahr 2018. Die im Gebiet des heutigen Israel/Pal{\"a}stina lebenden Pal{\"a}stinenserInnen bedienten sich in Zeiten ausl{\"a}ndischer Einflussnahme, z.B. w{\"a}hrend der britischen Besatzung im vergangenen Jahrhundert, verschiedenster Widerstandsformen und -strategien. Jedoch haben die Osloer Abkommen zwischen der israelischen Regierung und der pal{\"a}stinensischen F{\"u}hrung die dezentrale und partizipative Mobilisierung der pal{\"a}stinensischen Gesellschaft erschwert, die andauernde Enteignung von Pal{\"a}stinenserInnen beg{\"u}nstigt und ihre Rechte bis zum heutigen Tag weiter eingeschr{\"a}nkt. Die heutige pal{\"a}stinensische Gesellschaft im Westjordanland ist daher durch Zersplitterung, geografische und gesellschaftliche Segregation und doppelte Un-terdr{\"u}ckung durch die israelische Besatzung sowie die Pal{\"a}stinensische Autonomiebeh{\"o}rde gekennzeichnet. Zudem f{\"u}hrt die Etablierung verschiedener geografischer Entit{\"a}ten, in denen Pal{\"a}stinenserInnen unterschiedlichen Formen israelischer Herrschaft, Regularien und Ein-griffsrechten unterworfen sind, dazu, dass pal{\"a}stinensisches claim-making auch formalrecht-lich eingeschr{\"a}nkt ist. Um die Aktivit{\"a}ten nichtstaatlicher Akteure in diesem Kontext beschreiben zu k{\"o}nnen, wer-den h{\"a}ufig das Konzept der Zivilgesellschaft oder das der acts of citizenship herangezogen. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird jedoch argumentiert, dass diese Konzepte nur bedingt auf den Status Quo im Westjordanland anwendbar sind und pal{\"a}stinensisches claim-making nicht hinreichend verstehen und beschreiben k{\"o}nnen. Im Laufe des Forschungsprozesses hat sich daher das Konzept der acts of subjecthood als neuer theoretischer Ansatz herausgebildet, der claim-making in repressiven Kontexten beschreibt, in denen nichtstaatliche Akteure nur geringen Handlungsspielraum haben, ihre Forderungen durchsetzen zu k{\"o}nnen. Durch diese „Theorie-Brille" erm{\"o}glicht meine Forschung einen neuartigen Blick auf den israelisch-pal{\"a}stinensischen Konflikt und tr{\"a}gt auf diese Weise zu einem besseren Verst{\"a}ndnis von claim-making-Aktivit{\"a}ten im Westjordanland bei. Dar{\"u}ber hinaus bettet die vorliegende Ar-beit acts of subjecthood in den gr{\"o}ßeren Kontext des Siedlungskolonialismus ein. Dieser beschreibt eine Form des Kolonialismus, die darauf abzielt, eine einheimische Bev{\"o}lkerung durch die der Kolonialmacht zu ersetzen. Im Westjordanland manifestiert sich der israelische Siedlungskolonialismus in der Einschr{\"a}nkung der Bewegungsfreiheit von Pal{\"a}stinenserIn-nen, dem Bau von Siedlungen, der Zerst{\"o}rung von H{\"a}usern, Gewalt und Inhaftierungen. Die Verwendung der Grounded Theory und des induktiven Denkens als methodische Ans{\"a}tze erm{\"o}glichte es, verallgemeinerbare Aussagen zum Zustand pal{\"a}stinensischen claim-makings treffen zu k{\"o}nnen. Diese Verallgemeinerungen beruhen auf der Analyse von Sekund{\"a}rquellen und Daten, die im Rahmen von Interviews mit VertreterInnen nichtstaatlicher Organisationen in Israel/Pal{\"a}stina erhoben wurden. Die durchgef{\"u}hrte Analyse macht deutlich, dass nicht eine einzelne Maßnahme oder Bedingung pal{\"a}stinensisches claim-making behindert, sondern eine komplexe, vielschichtige und zielgerichtet implementierte Struktur. Diese verringert einerseits den Lebensraum von Pal{\"a}stinenserInnen durch Besatzung und Zerst{\"o}rung und schr{\"a}nkt andererseits den zivilen Raum ein, indem sie ihnen grundlegende Rechte und fundamentale Freiheiten verwehrt. Obwohl die konkreten Auswirkungen pal{\"a}stinensischer acts of subjecthood marginal sind, tragen sie dazu bei, den Widerstand gegen politische Unterdr{\"u}ckung zu st{\"a}rken und fortzusetzen. Angesichts der Verletzung von V{\"o}lkerrecht und der Missachtung zahlreicher UN-Resolutionen durch die israelische Regierung, der Niederlagen von Menschenrechtsorganisationen vor israelischen Gerichten, der Unterdr{\"u}ckung von Institutionen im Westjordanland durch die Pal{\"a}stinensische Autonomiebeh{\"o}rde und die Besatzungspolitik k{\"o}nnen acts of subjecthood die derzeitigen Machtstrukturen nicht aufbrechen. Dennoch sind die anhaltende Beharrlichkeit nichtstaatlicher Akteure, Forderungen zu artikulieren und Rechte einzufordern und die Gr{\"u}ndung neuer Initiativen und Organisationen essenziell f{\"u}r die St{\"a}rkung gesellschaftlicher Resilienz sowie die Dokumentation von Ungerechtigkeiten und Rechtsverletzungen. Diese Akteure legen so den Grundstein f{\"u}r einen m{\"o}glichen gesellschaftspolitischen Wandel in der Zukunft.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Ehrentraut2011,
  author    = {Ehrentraut, Stefan},
  title     = {Perpetually temporary citizenship and ethnic Vietnamese in Cambodia},
  series = {Ethnic and racial studies},
  volume    = {34},
  journal   = {Ethnic and racial studies},
  number    = {5},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {0141-9870},
  doi       = {10.1080/01419870.2010.537359},
  pages     = {779 -- 798},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {There is a clear trend in Western democratic countries towards regularizing the status of long-term ethnic minority residents through the conferral of full and equal citizenship rights. Ethnic minorities who arrived as irregular or temporary migrants in the West are increasingly allowed to follow the immigrant path towards integration into the broader citizenry. This is largely due to recognition that the price of exclusion is not only unjust, but it increases the risk of racial tensions, criminality, and social violence. Investigating the relevance of these Western developments to Cambodia, this article focuses on Cambodia's ethnic Vietnamese minority. Despite residing in Cambodia for generations, ethnic Vietnamese have traditionally been regarded as 'foreign residents' and denied citizenship. Based on extensive field research, this article considers the history and reality of Cambodia's ethnic Vietnamese minority as well as the ethnically-exclusionary policies and practices of the state and Khmer majority towards them.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{Karolewski2007,
  author    = {Karolewski, Ireneusz Pawel},
  title     = {B{\"u}rgerschaft und kollektive Identit{\"a}t in Europa},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-13418},
  year      = {2007},
  abstract  = {In Auseinandersetzung mit dem Konzept kollektiver Identit{\"a}t werden drei B{\"u}rgerschafts-Modelle (republikanisches, liberales und c{\"a}sarisches) diskutiert. B{\"u}rgerschaft wird im Sinne von citizenship anstelle von Staatsb{\"u}rgerschaft wegen deren etatistischer Konnotation in der deutschen Sprache verwendet. Abschließend wird die europ{\"a}ische B{\"u}rgerschaft sowie deren korrespondierende kollektive Identit{\"a}t betrachtet.},
  language  = {de}
}
@misc{Yilmaz2019,
  author    = {Yilmaz, Zafer},
  title     = {The genesis of the 'Exceptional' Republic},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {113},
  issn      = {1867-5808},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-43416},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-434164},
  pages     = {22},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Almost half of the political life has been experienced under the state of emergency and state of siege policies in the Turkish Republic. In spite of such a striking number and continuity in the deployment of legal emergency powers, there are just a few legal and political studies examining the reasons for such permanency in governing practices. To fill this gap, this paper aims to discuss one of the most important sources of the 'permanent' political crisis in the country: the historical evolution of legal emergency power. In order to highlight how these policies have intensified the highly fragile citizenship regime by weakening the separation of power, repressing the use of political rights and increasing the discretionary power of both the executive and judiciary authori- ties, the paper sheds light on the emergence and production of a specific form of legality based on the idea of emergency and the principle of executive prerogative. In that context, it aims to provide a genealogical explanation of the evolution of the excep- tional form of the nation-state, which is based on the way political society, representation, and legitimacy have been instituted and accompanying failure of the ruling classes in building hegemony in the country.},
  language  = {en}
}