This paper explores the relationship between state-reconstruction and democratisation in Libya following the collapse of the authoritarian regimes in the wake of the 2011 Arab Spring, through an analysis of the results of an original public opinion survey that was conducted in 2019. The 2011 Arab Spring witnessed the collapse of Libya’s authoritarian regime of Colonel Mu‘ammar al-Qadhdhāfī. Since then, a “liberal” state-reconstruction based on democracy and free markets has been pursued, and three national elections have been held. However, during this process, political violence became rampant, including armed clashes between various political forces, and democracy never became the “only rule in town.” Why did Libyan citizens still go to the ballot boxes even if national-reconstruction and national unity were stalled? What did they hope to achieve by voting? Or, what did they expect from the elections and, more broadly, from democracy and democratisation? This paper, relying on ‘Post Liberal Peacebuilding (PLPB)’ ideas, will consider this question, focusing on the trends of citizens rather than the design of ideal institutions. By answering these questions, this paper aims to clarify the reality of state reconstruction and democratisation in Libya after the Arab Spring.

抄録全体を表示

This article examines the rise of Muṣṭafā Arslān (1848/49–1914) and his family in late nineteenth-century Ottoman Mount Lebanon. While scholars have substantiated the overall integration of the Arab provincial leaders into the late Ottoman bureaucracy, they have often emphasized the initiative of the reforming state, and neglected the changing nature of these local elites in their community during this period. The present analysis traces the Arslān family’s meteoric rise from their status as a noble but uninfluential local family to holding a dominant position in the politics of Mount Lebanon. Unlike the tax-farming local gentry of the previous era, such as the Junblāṭs, they secured their power by actively cooperating with the central government and pursuing their career in the bureaucracy. Moreover, they could extend their influence outside their locality through the network of the Ottoman administration, as manifested in the Arslāns’ greater control over the Druze community of the Ḥawrān district. Their political ascension reached its zenith in the wake of the Young Turk Revolution of 1908. However, as these new political elites were raised by the bureaucracy, the chief members of the family, most notably Shakīb Arslān (1869–1946), increasingly acted as agencies of the central state, and were often in conflict with the local forces in Mount Lebanon.

抄録全体を表示

This article explores the historical background of this and other related occurrences and examines how animality and animal figures have been represented in Zionism. In antisemitic Europe, Jewish people were represented as such “subhuman animals” as ugly pigs, cunning snakes or filthy vermin. Max Nordau recognized that Jews in the modern world were viewed as morally degenerate, savage animal and advocated Zionism as a means of combating, eliminating and transcending these toxic, negative, antisemitic stereotypes. During and after Sho’ah, Jewish people were compared to “sheep” cementing a motif of weakness and passive sacrifice, typified by the phrase, “Like sheep to the slaughter.” Since the creation of an Israeli state, this Jewish “passivity” during Sho’ah and the necessity of never again allowing Jewish people to be so weak and docile has become a recurring motif frequently mobilized when Zionists want to emphasize the necessity of forging a strong nation of robust Zionist subjects. In Zionism, animality is assigned such abject features as “moral degeneration,” “dependency” or “weakness,” traits having no place in Jewishness given that, Zionism is a rehabilitative discourse in which the affirmation of humanity is achieved through the negation of animality.

抄録全体を表示

From the late seventeenth century to the early eighteenth century, disordering caused by “pirates” still continued aroung the Agean and Adriatic sea areas, where were battle fields in wars between the Ottoman empire and Venice just before the treaty of Karlowitz in 1699. In this situation, the Ottomans and the Venetians were trying to take anti-Ottoman “piracy” measures based on ahdnâmes. Maritime regime against “piracy” have been established during the sixteenth century and followed with slight elaborating some articles until the last ahdnâme given in the first half of the eighteenth century. The formation process of maritime regime on ahdnâmes are well known, however, its applications and practices have not received much attention. In this paper, we examined anti-“piracy” practices during that period with analyzing the Ottoman imperial orders registered in Düvel-i Ecnebiye Defteri 16/4, which shows continuing to following the “traditional” maritime regime on ahdnâmes since for the sixteenth century in practice, while the relationship between the Ottoman empire and Venice was beginning to adopt the European legal system in part.

抄録全体を表示

This paper focuses on one of Kabyle villages located in Tizi-Ouzou, “the village H,” which is known as a village for women’s carpet weaving since the French colonial period. Furthermore, it focuses on the cultural association “Kahina,” organized by the young people in the late 1980s with an aim to promote and preserve the village’s culture and its historical heritage toward the women’s carpet weaving, as well as support these female weavers in accessing the market. By discussing how the association has utilized the colonial heritage in articulating their village’s historical backgrounds that are firmly entangled with French colonialism, the paper reveals that village H’s tradition of carpet weaving was invented under the educational system sanctioned by the colonial administration. In addition, taking their practice into consideration, the paper concludes that the association functions as the agent that has utilized its colonial heritage to authorize and provide the female villagers an authenticity through their own interpretations about the history of the village. This is done although some aspects and concerns around these individuals’ complex and multiple identities being trivialized in terms of ethnic and national “culture.”

抄録全体を表示