Using Micro-Level Data to Map State Failure: The Example of Somalia

Maedl, Anna; Haer, Roos; Odenwald, Michael

doi:10.1080/13698249.2011.555692

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 A sample of a long-entrenched tradition includes Ezrow and Frantz 2013;Brookings Institute 2011;Maedla et al 2011;Naudé et al 2011;Robb-Jackson 2010;Ndulo and 2 See for example Barak 2013;Mitchell 1991;Kalpagam 1999;Cooper 1992. 3 See Trüper et al 2015 and chapters in their volume for a discussion of the plurality of forms teleology took in European thought from the 18th century onwards.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

African Anti-colonialism in International Relations: Against the Time of Forgetting

Jones

2018

Recentering Africa in International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Africa's condition and position in the world today is routinely described and analysed in terms of weakness, fragility and failure. These categories dominate academic study of Africa's postcolonial condition, especially within IR and cognate fields of political science and development studies, 1 as well as policy and media discourse. Implicit in the broader IR discourse on Africa's "failure" is a rather contemptuous attitude towards and analysis of anticolonialism and decolonization. The tone of much of the mainstream scholarship about postcolonial African statehood and sovereignty implicitly and at times explicitly endorses colonial rule, apparently lamenting the rushed and ill-informed process of independence (for example Hyden 2012).According to Robert Jackson, decolonization is responsible for "bringing into existence a large number of sovereign governments which are limited in their capacity or desire to provide civil and socioeconomic goods for their populations" (Jackson 1990: 9). This attitude ensues from the discipline's failure not only to acknowledge the centrality of colonialism and its legacies to the making of the modern international order, but also to consider colonialism and anticolonialism in theoretical terms, as experiences and relationships of international relations which demand serious critical reflection (Grovogui 2001). This chapter develops this line of argument by focusing on notions of time and historical temporality. Scholars have recently started to expose how discipline of IR has long examined world politics and the international without reflecting critically on assumed and historically specific structures of and ideas about time (Hutchings 2008;Hom 2010;Agathangelou and Killian 2014a). The result is that dominant Western notions of time and history remain entrenched within contemporary analyses of international relations. As Andrew Hom points out, "excluding time from academic investigations of social phenomena prolongs and empowers its hidden influence"

show abstract