**For the 29th annual ASEN conference taking place on 24-25 April, this week we have two featured articles related to the conference theme of nationalism and self-determination.**

Nationalism, Ethnicity and Self‐determination: A Paradigm Shift?

By Ephraim Nimni

Volume 9, Issue 2, pages 319-332

Abstract

An ongoing paradigm shift is giving birth to a more multidimensional understanding of the relationship between nationalism, sovereignty, self‐determination and democratic governance. A common element among the various versions of the new paradigm is the dispersal of democratic governance across multiple and overlapping jurisdictions. Governmental processes are no longer seen as discrete, centralised and homogenous (as in the old nation‐state model) but as asymmetrical, multilayered, multicultural and devolved into multiple jurisdictions. These changes have hardly affected the two main conceptual frameworks that dominate the study of nationalism: modernism and ethnosymbolism. As a result, these frameworks risk becoming irrelevant to the new forms of national self‐determination, asymmetrical governance and shared sovereignty. Modernism and ethnosymbolism insist that nationalism seeks to equate the nation with a sovereign state, while in reality the overwhelming majority of nations are stateless and unable to build nation states because they often inhabit territories shared with other nations. The paradigm shift occurs through the realisation that nation‐state sovereignty is no longer a feasible solution to the demands of stateless nations. Ethnosymbolism is in a much better position to adapt to the paradigm shift provided it abandons the claim that the nation state is the best shell for the nation.

Read the full article here.

The Relation between Imperialism and Nationalism in the German Empire and its Aftermath: A Bourdieusian Field Theoretical Perspective

By Juho Korhonen

Volume 18, Issue 2, pages 167-187

Abstract

In this article I explore the relation between empire and nationalism in the late German Empire and its aftermath. I argue, from the perspective of Bourdieusian field theory and the political field, that the transformation of the relation between empire and nationalism was connected to colonial expansion that prompted political actors to formulate ‘imperial policies’ aimed at subverting dominant power. The rise of national self‐determination following the First World War (WWI) thwarted this development by confining the political field into a national framework and separating nationalism from empire. This was the emergence of what Bourdieu called national metacapital that has the capacity to regulate and define other forms of capital and their exchange in an ideal‐type nation‐state, in contrast to imperial symbolic capital that mediates and connects other forms of capital.

Read the full article here.

Jewish‐Ukrainian‐Soviet Relations during the Civil War and the Second Thoughts of a Minister for Jewish Affairs

By Simon Rabinovich

Volume 17, Issue 3, pages 339-357

Abstract

A century after the dissolution of the Russian Empire and its descent into multidirectional civil war, the memory of what took place in Ukraine during 1917–1922 diverges into very different stories among Ukrainians, Russians, and Jews. By focusing on the example of Avraham Revutsky, a Minister for Jewish Affairs in Ukraine’s Directory government, this article suggests that the lines of conflict during those violent years may not have been as clear as they appear now. From Revutsky’s previously unknown statement made to Soviet authorities in Berlin in 1922, included in full and translated here, it is possible to glimpse both the complications of Jewish‐Ukrainian‐Soviet relations during the civil war, and how, in the face of the first Soviet show trials, individuals sought to shape the way their wartime actions and motives would be remembered.

Read the full article here.

**Due to the Israeli election on Tuesday (9th) and the Indian election starting on Thursday (11th), this week’s featured weekly articles respond to these two events.**

Ethno‐religious Fundamentalism and Theo‐ethnocratic Politics in Israel

By Nissim Leon

Volume 14, Issue 1, pages 20-35

Abstract

This article addresses the transition of a fundamentalist confrontational religious ideology into an assertive, religio‐nationalist ideology by the case of the ethno‐Ultra‐Orthodox (haredi) Shas party in Israel. Alongside the haredi proclivity towards insularity, we also detect, in recent decades, two new trends within the haredi mainstream. First, we see increasing numbers of haredim (Ultra‐Orthodox Jews) integrating into different frameworks that are situated outside of the haredi enclave: the job market, the army, welfare and charity organizations, and more. A second trend, which I will elaborate upon here, is a fundamentalist religious interpretation of elements of Israeli national identity. This trend seeks to view Jewish law, in its orthodox interpretation, as a source for the conservation and maintenance of Jewish identity in Israel: firstly, through the turning of haredism into a dominant factor in the religio‐communal arena in Israel; and secondly, through assuming responsibility for demarcating the boundaries of the Jewish collective.

Read the full article here.

Identities in India: Region, Nationality and Nationalism ‐ A Theoretical Framework

By Subhakanta Behera

Volume 7, Issue 2, pages 79-93

Abstract

Given the complexity of identity in India, where ethnicity alone can only inadequately define constituent regional communities such as the Oriyas, Bengalis, Tamils and Keralites, a regional perspective provides a more useful analytical approach. In India, a territorially defined region is the most inclusive segment, which has linguistic, historical and socio‐cultural connotations. Apart from the historical importance of region, it has now taken many ethnic characteristics within its ambit. While discussing the importance of ‘region’ in India, this article tries to show the weakness of an ethnic perspective in defining the identity of various language‐based, but geographically confined, communities of India. The article also tries to explore how regional identities can be reconciled with a pan‐Indian ideology. Perhaps in the post‐modern world, this is the greatest challenge that India has to grapple with, and one that requires judicious policies and practices.

Read the full article here.

Split Allegiances: Cultural Muslims and the Tension Between Religious and National Identity in Multicultural Societies

By Liza Hopkins and Cameron McAuliffe

Volume 10, Issue 1, pages 38-58

Abstract

Second generation Australians from a Muslim background have appeared on the political radar recently as a group at risk of disengagement due to their potentially split allegiances. For these young Australians, the traditional tension over diasporic allegiances between the homeland and the country in which they live is further complicated by religious identity. This paper offers two case studies of the second generation of two mainly Islamic, but otherwise very different, ethnonational communities in Australia, Turkish and Iranian. It examines the responses of these groups to the rising essentialisation and ethnicisation of Islam, at the expense of ethnic and sociocultural difference. In particular, the paper focuses on the way secular practice and religious identity converge into ‘cultural Islam’. We use the term cultural Islam as a way of describing those, particularly of the second and third generations in Australia, who proudly claim their Islamic heritage while choosing not to participate actively in religious life.

Read the full article here.

Competing Nationalisms, Euromaidan, and the Russian‐Ukrainian Conflict

By Taras Kuzio

Volume 15, Issue 1, pages 157-169

Introduction

Although Ukraine is a regionally diverse country, it had succeeded in peacefully managing inter‐ethnic and linguistic tension between competing nationalisms and identities. However, the rise of the openly pro‐Russian Party of Regions political machine after the Orange Revolution, whose leader came to power in 2010, and the evolution of Vladimir Putin’s regime from proponent of statist to ethnic nationalism, heightened Ukrainian inter‐regional and inter‐state conflict. Viktor Yanukovych’s policies provoked popular protests that became the Euromaidan. His unwillingness to compromise and his fear of leaving office led to violence and the breakdown of state structures, opening the way for Russia’s interventions in the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. This article investigates the sources for the violence during and after the Euromaidan and Russia’s interventions. It argues that domestic and foreign factors served to change the dynamics of Russian speakers in Ukraine from one of passivity in the late 1980s through to the 2004 Orange Revolution; low‐level mobilization from 2005 to 2013; and high‐level mobilization, crystallization of pro‐ and anti‐Ukrainian camps, and violent conflict from 2014.

The first section integrates theories of nationalism with competing Russian and Ukrainian nationalisms and Russian speakers in Ukraine and the former Soviet Union. The second section analyses ethnic Ukrainian and east Slav nationalisms (Shulman 2005), as well as Soviet and post‐Soviet portrayals of Ukrainian nationalism as ‘fascism’. The conclusion analyses three influences on Ukrainian national identity arising from the Euromaidan and Russia’s interventions.

Read the full article here.