|
|
|
|
Uncommon Ground: Indivisible Territory and the Politics of Legitimacy |
|
| Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Get this Document | Similar Titles |
|
STOP! You can now view the document associated with this citation by clicking on the "View Document as HTML" link below. |
|
Click here to view the document
|
Abstract:
|
In Jerusalem, Ireland, Kosovo, and Kashmir, indivisible territory underlies much of international conflict. I argue whether or not territory appears indivisible depends upon how actors legitimate their claims to territory during negotiations. Although actors choose their legitimations strategically, in order to gain a political advantage at the bargaining table, legitimation strategies have unintended structural consequences: by resonating with some actors and not others, legitimations either build ties between coalitions, and allow each side to recognize the legitimacy of each other’s claims, or else lock actors into bargaining positions where they are unable to recognize the legitimacy of their opponent’s demands. When the latter happens, actors come to negotiations with incompatible claims, constructing the territory as indivisible. I apply this legitimation theory to Ulster, arguing this territory’s indivisibility was not inevitable, but a product of actors’ legitimation strategies as they battled for support over the issue of Ireland’s right to self-rule. |
Most Common Document Word Stems:
legitim (196), actor (171), indivis (143), strategi (140), ulster (124), conserv (111), coalit (89), rule (83), polit (77), irish (75), home (73), nationalist (69), see (67), posit (64), claim (60), ireland (58), bargain (57), legitimaci (55), conflict (54), tie (53), issu (53), |
|
|
 | Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! |  | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. |  | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! |  | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! |  | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. |  | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! |  | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
Association:
Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
|
Citation:
|
MLA Citation:
| Goddard, Stacie. "Uncommon Ground: Indivisible Territory and the Politics of Legitimacy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2011-03-14 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41776_index.html> |
APA Citation:
| Goddard, S. E. , 2005-09-01 "Uncommon Ground: Indivisible Territory and the Politics of Legitimacy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2011-03-14 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41776_index.html |
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: In Jerusalem, Ireland, Kosovo, and Kashmir, indivisible territory underlies much of international conflict. I argue whether or not territory appears indivisible depends upon how actors legitimate their claims to territory during negotiations. Although actors choose their legitimations strategically, in order to gain a political advantage at the bargaining table, legitimation strategies have unintended structural consequences: by resonating with some actors and not others, legitimations either build ties between coalitions, and allow each side to recognize the legitimacy of each other’s claims, or else lock actors into bargaining positions where they are unable to recognize the legitimacy of their opponent’s demands. When the latter happens, actors come to negotiations with incompatible claims, constructing the territory as indivisible. I apply this legitimation theory to Ulster, arguing this territory’s indivisibility was not inevitable, but a product of actors’ legitimation strategies as they battled for support over the issue of Ireland’s right to self-rule. |
Get this Document:
Find this citation or document at one or all of these locations below. The links below may have the citation or the entire document for free or you may purchase access to the document. Clicking on these links will change the site you're on and empty your shopping cart.
| Document Type: |
application/pdf |
| Page count: |
53 |
| Word count: |
14855 |
| Text sample: |
| Uncommon Ground: indivisible territory and the politics of legitimacy Stacie E. Goddard sgoddard@wellesley.edu Department of Political Science Wellesley College Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association Washington D.C. September 1 2005. A version of this paper is forthcoming in International Organization Winter 2006. Uncommon Ground: indivisible territory and the politics of legitimacy Stacie E. Goddard In Jerusalem Ireland Kosovo and Kashmir indivisible territory underlies much of international conflict. I argue whether or not territory |
| Conservatives Constitutional Nationalists Liberals Constitutional Nationalists Liberals Republicans Republicans Conservatives Strong tie Ulster Conservatives Weak tie Figure 2 Changes in networks of coalitions 1886-1913 |
Similar Titles:
Strategy for Territoriality and Military Conflict with Non-State Actors
Domestic Politics and the Road to War: Political Decay, Shifting Ruling Strategies, and Crisis Decision Making in Great Power Conflicts Since 1815
Ideology, Issue Preferences, and Political Choice: The Paradox of Conflicted Conservatives
|
|