東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

The Treatment of Ethnic Minorities i...

Geri, Maurizio.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The Treatment of Ethnic Minorities in Democratizing Muslim Countries: The Securitization of Kurds in Turkey Versus the Autonomization of Acehnese in Indonesia.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The Treatment of Ethnic Minorities in Democratizing Muslim Countries: The Securitization of Kurds in Turkey Versus the Autonomization of Acehnese in Indonesia./
作者:	Geri, Maurizio.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2017,
面頁冊數:	263 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-12(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International78-12A(E).
標題:	International relations. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10273931
ISBN:	9780355100983

The Treatment of Ethnic Minorities in Democratizing Muslim Countries: The Securitization of Kurds in Turkey Versus the Autonomization of Acehnese in Indonesia.
Geri, Maurizio.

The Treatment of Ethnic Minorities in Democratizing Muslim Countries: The Securitization of Kurds in Turkey Versus the Autonomization of Acehnese in Indonesia. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2017 - 263 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-12(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Old Dominion University, 2017.

Samuel Huntington, almost half century ago, explained how the state capacity is fundamental to guarantee order in societies in transition. Francis Fukuyama, recently, recuperated this concept arguing that a strong effective state is fundamental for stability of democratizing countries. But strong institutions are not enough to make democracy and political order compatible: institutions need to be also inclusive, to foster participation and respect the freedom of all parts of society, including ethnic minorities.

ISBN: 9780355100983Subjects--Topical Terms:

531762
International relations.

The Treatment of Ethnic Minorities in Democratizing Muslim Countries: The Securitization of Kurds in Turkey Versus the Autonomization of Acehnese in Indonesia.
LDR:03825nmm a2200301 4500 001 2161072
005 20180821113840.5
008 190424s2017 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780355100983
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10273931
035 $a (MiAaPQ)odu:10443
035 $a AAI10273931
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Geri, Maurizio. $3 3321901
245 1 4 $a The Treatment of Ethnic Minorities in Democratizing Muslim Countries: The Securitization of Kurds in Turkey Versus the Autonomization of Acehnese in Indonesia.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2017
300 $a 263 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-12(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: David Earnest.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Old Dominion University, 2017.
520 $a Samuel Huntington, almost half century ago, explained how the state capacity is fundamental to guarantee order in societies in transition. Francis Fukuyama, recently, recuperated this concept arguing that a strong effective state is fundamental for stability of democratizing countries. But strong institutions are not enough to make democracy and political order compatible: institutions need to be also inclusive, to foster participation and respect the freedom of all parts of society, including ethnic minorities.
520 $a The main question this study wants to answer is: what factors explain the differences in how democratizing Muslim countries treat their ethnic minorities? In other terms: why do democratizing Muslim majority states differ in their approaches to the incorporation of ethnic minorities? Studies of social conflict in Muslim countries typically emphasize sectarian divisions but ignore ethnic differences. Likewise, theories of democratization in Muslim countries examine the rights of religious minorities but overlook the inclusion of ethnic minorities. The research is a comparative analysis of two similar cases with different outcomes: Turkey and Indonesia. The importance of the study is based also on the fact that the "Arab exceptionalism", and the failure or success of Muslim democracies in general, depended often in the past on a domestic variable: the exclusion or inclusion of ethnic, religious or political minorities by the new regimes, as the failing of the Arab Spring showed also recently (see Egypt/Iraq versus Tunisia/Morocco). The focus of the study is to analyze specifically two cases and outcomes: the securitization (Buzan et. al., 1998) of Kurds in Turkey and the "autonomization" (Lijphart, 2004) of Acehnese in Indonesia, to understand what independent variables affect these different results. The cases chosen are the two most scholarly recognized democracies in the Muslim world. The hypotheses to test are four: the elites' power interest, following the Rational Choice theory, the international factors, following the structural theories, the institutions and history of the state, following the Historical-Institutionalist theory, and finally the ontological security of the country, following the Critical theories. Also, by examining states with ethnic diversity but very little religious diversity, the research controls for the effect of religious conflict on minority inclusion, and so allow future generalization and comparison to minority inclusion in democratizing states that are not Muslim. The methodological approach is a qualitative analysis of case studies. The research design is based on the 'most similar systems' (Miller criteria) and on 'process tracing', to clarify the causal chain between the independent variables and the outcome.
590 $a School code: 0418.
650 4 $a International relations. $3 531762
690 $a 0601
710 2 $a Old Dominion University. $b Political Science/Geography. $3 3349017
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 78-12A(E).
790 $a 0418
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2017
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10273931