In order to analyse contemporary global crises, it is necessary for scholars of International Relations and Area Studies to overcome two limitations: Area Studies’ tendency to focus only on the substance of certain states or areas and the state-centric understanding of International Relations. Contemporary conflicts and faultlines that intermingle and interlock from the local level to the global level cannot be explained simply by unilineal causal relations among the existing actors but rather are complicated by their reciprocal interaction. In order to grasp the widespread networks of co-relationship among various actors, a new analytical framework should be introduced which frames current affairs as the product of a web of interconnections, and as a result of the transformation of those relationships, rather than on the actors’ essential qualities.

As a case study of the above new framework, this paper analyses sectarian “faultlines” in post-war Iraq. Since 2003, violent clashes have occurred in Iraq, which Western media and policy-makers considered to be “sectarian conflicts.” As most of the Western policy-makers assume an essentialist understanding of sectarian relations in Iraq, they consider the sectarian factor as an explanatory and independent valuable. However, in order to propose an alternative approach to the perception of sectarian groups as cohesive actors, this paper avoids substantial “sectarian factors” for explanations of conflict in post-2003 Iraq, and focuses instead on the transformation of the various kinds of relationships that led to political and social strife. It sees how sectarian factors emerge as a result of mobilisation of rhetoric and legitimisation of fighting parties.

This paper analyses media narratives in Iraq and surrounding states. It discloses that pro-government Iraqi media and Iranian media consider IS as inhuman terrorists while Arab and Turkish media as a reflection of anti-government ideology and sentiments in Iraqi society. In the regional power struggle between Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, each media, domestic or regional, focuses on the victimhood of their side, and a sectarian narrative further legitimatises the appeal of the victims for their rights. For each side it is not “us” but “others” that discriminate us and exclude us from the Iraqi nation or from the religion of Islam; each side uses sectarian terms to demonise the others, with each insisting that it is “us” who pursue the unity of the community. This paper concludes that the conflicts in post-war Iraq are caused by the competition among the fighting actors over the right to claim the injustice of marginalisation, which often relies on sectarian legitimisation.

抄録全体を表示

第一次世界大戦前の一九一一年からリビアはイタリアによって過酷な植民地支配を受け、多くのリビア人が犠牲になった。そのなかで社会参加型の視点をもった神秘主義思想を目指したサヌースィー教団の活動は、戦間期のネオ・スーフィズムの一環であったとみなされる。その活動は砂漠の遊牧民の団結を目標に展開され、ジハードを掲げて武装集団を指揮し、リビアへ侵攻するヨーロッパ列強の撃退を担った。創始者の大サヌースィーによって最初の修道場が建設されて以降、特に第三代教団長の下では、リビア以外のエジプト、スーダンでも外国勢力と戦うことになった。神秘主義教団によるゲリラ戦は負け戦になることが多かったが、第二次世界大戦では連合軍に加わり、小規模ながらこの参戦によって戦後の一九五一年一二月にリビア連合王国の独立を勝ち取った。サヌースィー教団の活動は、西洋列強による植民地政策に抵抗する政治的活動を宗教的に意味づける効果があった。

抄録全体を表示

As nationalism was one of the most important aspects of Kemalism, the early Turkish Republic showed no interest in the areas and peoples beyond her border. Atatürk suppressed the activities of those advocating Pan Turkism and had them purged, but after his death, Ismet Inönü recognized their rights and the movement rose again.
During the final years of the First World War, Nuri Pasha, who was one of the younger brothers of Enver Pasha, and his uncle Halil Pasha advanced towards the Caucasus region with an army. After the war they stayed in Berlin. After returning to Turkey, Nuri established a weapon factory. Many people visited him because of the nostalgia they felt for his brother Enver Pasha. During the republican era, there were many generals and officers within the Turkish Armed Forces who admired Enver Pasha, and the relatives of generals monopolized the weapon industry.
Hüseyin Hüsnü Emir Erkilet fought together with German colleagues during the First World War and retired as a major general in 1932. As for the reason for his retiring at such a young age, a famous story has it that it was because he gave the map of the fortified zone of Çanakkale to the Germans, but the real reason was his intimate relationship with the Freedom Party.
In 1925, Nuri and Erkilet secretly assembled with friends who had fought in Caucasus, in 1940 Erkilet, Halil and their families vacationed together, and after 1941 they often held meetings concerned with the Turkic peoples living in the Soviet Union.
It was thought that Erkilet was pro-German, though in his articles in the ‘Cumhuriyet’ newspaper he seemed to be neutral. However, after the start of the Nazi-Soviet War, he was active against not only the Soviet Union but also the Russians.
In September 1941 Nuri visited Berlin, and proposed to persons of authority in the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs that the Turkic peoples found their own states and organize the Muslim corps to support the German forces. Moreover, he stated that a Pan Turkist cabinet would be formed in Turkey and most of the officers would support it, and he mentioned the name of General Kazim Orbay, his brotherin-law who commanded the 3rd Army, as a person who would play an important role in the Pan Turkism movement.
Hitler personally invited the two retired generals Erkilet and Ali Ihsan Sabis to the eastern front, and so they applied for the necessary visas for leaving the country. However the Turkish government intervened and replaced Sabis with General Ali Fuat Erden. In this way, the Turkish government turned the personal invitation into an official one.
In 1944, after the advance of the Red Army towards Eastern Europe, the Turkish government arrested the Pan Turkists and began the trial so-called “Racism and Pan Turkism Trial.” They were convicted on the pretext of having cooperated with the Germans. However since Nuri and Erkilet were prominent persons under the patronage of the Turkish Armed Forces, they were neither arrested nor indicted even though they had close German ties.
General Erden, who was promoted to chief judge of the Supreme Court-Martial, dismissed the verdict of the “Racism and Pan-Turkism Trial.” As the reason for this dismissal, it was thought that he believed that it was not necessary for Turkey to demonstrate any sympathy for the Soviet Union. However, at the same time, there were conflicts between Inonu and the Turkish Armed Forces as is shown by the contraversy over Fevzi Çakmak's pension and Orbay's resignation. After the war, the explosion in Nuri's factory and his death gave rise to active discussions in the Turkish National Assembly. This also proves that there were many opponents to Inönu.

抄録全体を表示