Europe and the Arab World: The dilemma of recognising counterparts

Burgat, François

doi:10.1057/ip.2009.16

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet another contributing factor was that the free-speech frame lay at the very heart of the journalistic profession, mirrored in the fact that Jyllands-Posten started the event by challenging the notion of self-censorship, which generated widespread international media interest (Berkowitz and Eko 2007;Kunelius and Nossek 2008). Second, in terms of domestic political considerations, one important contributing aspect was the ongoing power struggle between moderate Muslim parties and Islamist political organizations in, for example, Egypt and Palestine (Burgat 2009). 6 Third, the importance of transnational networks was demonstrated by the Danish organization Community of Islamic Faith and its lobbying around the Muslim world marketing its framing.…”

Section: Final Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crisis Communication as a Multilevel Game: The Muhammad Cartoons from a Crisis Diplomacy Perspective

Lindholm

Olsson

2010

The International Journal of Press/Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Muhammad cartoon crisis in 2005 provides an illustrative example of how crises travel across geographical boundaries, in this case, from a national newspaper into a full-fledged public diplomacy crisis at the international level. From a crisis management perspective, a multilevel setting poses a real challenge to actors trying to contain the situation at hand. Likewise, the multilevel nature of a crisis poses a challenge to crisis communication theories, which have traditionally focused on rhetorical strategies in single organizational crises. As a response, this article proposes a framework for examining crisis communication based on how actors’ framing impact the perceptions of arenas, stakeholders, and communication strategies.

show abstract

Section: Final Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crisis Communication as a Multilevel Game: The Muhammad Cartoons from a Crisis Diplomacy Perspective

Lindholm

Olsson

2010

The International Journal of Press/Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even when the EU engages with civil society, its support to the private sector tends to favour business actors tied to the regimes via patronage networks (Jünemann, 2002). Moreover, engagement with CSOs has also been rather selective, as the EU has preferred to deal with organizations that are not highly politicized or critical of incumbent regimes, usually excluding relevant components of the population, especially Islamist actors (Bicchi, 2009;Burgat, 2009;Cavatorta, 2006;Jünemann, 2002).…”

Section: With Whom? Actors Along the Inclusion/exclusion Spectrummentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing and reframing the EU’s engagement with the Mediterranean: Examining the security-stability nexus before and after the Arab uprisings

Roccu

Voltolini

2017

Mediterranean Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

EU policies towards the Southern Mediterranean after the Arab uprisings are predominantly seen in the literature as marked by continuity with the past. This is attributed to the fact that the EU still acts with the aim of maximising its security by preserving stability in the region. By examining a range of policy areas, this special issue aims to assess and qualify this claim. Its introduction outlines our case on both empirical and analytical grounds. Empirically, it is argued that we need to offer a more detailed analysis of each specific policy area to assess the extent of continuity and change. Analytically, this introduction proposes a framework that focuses on processes of frame definition and frame enactment to explain change and continuity in the EU's approach. More specifically, security, stability and the link between them-the security-stability nexus-are considered as the master frame shaping the EU's approach towards the Southern Mediterranean. This is enacted along two dimensions: the modalities of EU engagement with Southern Mediterranean partners; and the range of actors engaged.

show abstract

“…In other words, the US objectives after 9/11 meant more than just a simple military struggle (securitization) for the neo-conservative Bush administration. 2 They meant that US objectives were eternal and universal in their essence, and to struggle to keep these universal values of humanity alive and functional in the 21st century and onward was a sacred struggle as well as a vital responsibility of the world's lone superpower. Concomitant to this reification and acceleration of exceptionalist foreign policy, a neoconservative think-tank, Princeton Project, itemizes US National Security objectives in the 21 st century as securing the homeland against hostile attacks, building a healthy global economy, and spreading liberal democracy (See Parmar, 2009).…”

Section: Contextualizing Us Policy In the Middle Eastmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Obama, much as his predecessor, ignores the conditions of desperation of much of the Muslim world, as well as the Muslim cultural sensitivity to direct and indirect occupations. According to Francois Burgat, this desperation is the product of three ill-managed domains of politics: the global domain (occupied by the United States), Arab-Israeli domain, in which the US as the superpower is reluctant or refuses to regulate, and national Arab domains where totalitarianism gives no chance to emerging democratic representations (See Burgat, 2009).…”

Section: "It's the Eco-sociology Stupid"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Entendiendo la política exterior de Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea en el Medio Oriente

Anaz

2011

Estud. Polit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Los Estados Unidos, como el poder geopolítico dominante en el Medio Oriente, han estado luchando por estabilizar la región con el fin de alcanzar sus objetivos políticos y lograr sus intereses. Particularmente desde la Segunda Guerra Mundial, Estados Unidos ha priorizado, instituido y considerado las políticas del Medio Oriente como vitales para asegurar sus “intereses nacionales” hasta los ataques terroristas a las torres gemelas en la ciudad de Nueva York. Como es claro, los ataques terroristas del 11 de septiembre de 2001 marcaron un cambio dramático, no solo en las políticas de Estados Unidos, sino también en la retórica estadounidense, así como en los discursos internacionales. Luego de los ataques terroristas, las políticas de Estados Unidos con relación al Medio Oriente pasaron de ser una cuestión de “seguridad nacional”, lo cual básicamente hacía más énfasis en “la seguridad defensiva”, a ser una cuestión de “seguridad preventiva de los intereses nacionales” principalmente bajo la administración neoconservadora de George W. Bush. Como consecuencia, Estados Unidos adelantó dos incursiones militares en Afganistán (2001) y en Iraq (2003) donde se puso en la tarea de cambiar unilateralmente y de manera sensible el régimen de dichos Estados con el objeto de asegurar sus intereses nacionales y procurar la paz mundial a largo plazo. Es importante resaltar aquí que Estados Unidos autorizó el completo apoyo (por lo menos retóricamente) a las Naciones Unidas para desarmar el régimen Talibán en Afganistán. Este estudio revisa y conceptualiza la política exterior actual de los Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea con respecto al Medio Oriente —aunque no son idénticas— antes y después de los ataques terroristas del 11 de septiembre. El argumento aquí presentado es que los objetivos de la política exterior con relación al Medio Oriente, tanto de los Estados Unidos como de la Unión Europea, giran principalmente alrededor de dos puntos: la seguridad del petróleo y la protección del Estado de Israel en una región predominantemente árabe. De manera similar, aunque no exactamente de la misma forma, tanto Estados Unidos como la Unión Europea tienen intereses en establecer buenas relaciones con los Estados árabes así como en promover la democracia y la economía del mercado libre en el Medio Oriente. Este estudio también revisa las iniciativas de política exterior con el Medio Oriente del presidente Barack Obama e intenta indicar algunos puntos clave.

show abstract

Europe and the Arab World: The dilemma of recognising counterparts

Cited by 9 publications

References 9 publications

Crisis Communication as a Multilevel Game: The Muhammad Cartoons from a Crisis Diplomacy Perspective

Crisis Communication as a Multilevel Game: The Muhammad Cartoons from a Crisis Diplomacy Perspective

Framing and reframing the EU’s engagement with the Mediterranean: Examining the security-stability nexus before and after the Arab uprisings

Entendiendo la política exterior de Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea en el Medio Oriente

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About