Theorizing state stigmatization: A comparative perspective on South Africa and Israel

Abstract

This article deals with state stigmas in the international arena, and addresses the question: why do state-stigmas develop and become sustained in some cases, whereas in other cases they wither away? For parsimonious, analytical purposes we view the process of state stigmatisation through two, interrelated stages: the stigma’s development – where transnational civil society activists and the engagement of mainstream international media play an important role; and the stigma’s sustenance where these elements are joined by the target state’s coping strategy. For theoretical consistency, we limit ourselves to exploring states that are (a) involved in conflicts and (b) aspiring to be part of the Western-led ‘club’ of states. Through the analysis of press articles and UN documents relating to two vastly different case studies: South Africa (1985–1994) and Israel (2000–2019), we demonstrate that states in conflictual situations have limited manoeuvring space in dealing with their developing stigmas; and that the choice of tools utilized in the implementation of the same coping strategy can lead to different results.

K "Obvinění" Státu Izrael Ze Zločinu Apartheidu

“…1 uvádí, že rasovou diskriminací je "jakékoliv rozlišování, vylučování, omezování nebo zvýhodňování založené na rase, barvě pleti, rodovém nebo národnostním nebo etnickém původu." 30 Je tedy možné uvažovat o této otázce v souvislosti s lidskoprávním rozměrem tohoto institutu mezinárodního trestního práva? Podle prof. Lingas je tento způsob uvažování nezbytný, protože jinak by nemuseli být Palestinci shledáni za rasovou skupinu z důvodu nikoliv odlišné barvy pleti od nemalé části izraelské populace.…”