Unlike the Cold War era, in which realist perceptions about the global world order were prevalent, the explanation of roots of conflicts has since then increasingly shifted towards questions of...Show moreUnlike the Cold War era, in which realist perceptions about the global world order were prevalent, the explanation of roots of conflicts has since then increasingly shifted towards questions of culture and ethnicity. According to Samuel Huntington (1993, 1996), who introduced the notion of a clash of civilization, civilizations are fundamentally characterized by their respective religions. In concrete terms, it became a widely shared assumption that classical (realist) conflicts caused by economic, territorial or power-related motives were outdated. This thesis aims to build its argumentation on this “revitalization of religion” while aiming to assess the two opposing roles of Israelis and Palestinians as securitizing actors, which consistently invoke religion in their securitizing policies (Laustsen/Waever 2000: 705). These are fueled by myths and opposing identities that create an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ phenomenon. The human need for identity and its social construction is thus key for the further analysis. Taking a starting point from Lucke’s and McLarren’s (2017) work, the question is raised whether and how religion should be included within the securitizing framework. This work is based on the idea that religion is easily securitized by actors who base their entire argumentation on an existential threat posed by the ‘enemy’ against them.Show less
The European Union’s approach towards the OPT on human rights has often been criticised for its conflicting interests, its internal division and coordination. However, simply renouncing the EU’s...Show moreThe European Union’s approach towards the OPT on human rights has often been criticised for its conflicting interests, its internal division and coordination. However, simply renouncing the EU’s effort in human rights promotion in the name of realism, neo-liberalism or Eurocentric imperialism does not offer clarifications why the EU is committed to universal human rights norms and as to why the EU proved to be very weak in projecting its human rights agenda. This thesis suggests a normative power approach to the study of EU human rights policy towards the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Vital to it is the assumption that EU human rights policy and the relation between the EU and Israel has been and should be normative. To analyse this assumption, this thesis draws upon the existing literature in regard to ‘Normative Power Europe’ and adopt Ian Manners tripartite analytical framework in order to assess the EU’s adherence to human rights norms and its external identity, illustrate how the EU diffuses human rights norms, and how the impact of this should be evaluated in the case of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. In doing so, this thesis aims to add to the empirical abundance of NPE literature and applying normative power to the human rights dimensions of EU-Israeli relations. To address these goals, the research shows the inconsistencies between the EU’s rhetoric and the diffusion of norms in Israel’s policy. This thesis will argue that the EU has normative intentions but that this is not a precondition for firm action and the diffusion of human rights norms in Israel. The protection of human rights as core norm of the EU is easily sacrificed when it has to compete with (vital) self-interests such as a collective European identity, security interests and strategic interests. The extent to which the EU pursues a human rights agenda is nevertheless very limited to the detriment of the EU’s normative identity.Show less
