International Relations 06/10/2021

TD 5 – Identities
READING REPORT: Thomas Lindemann. “Peace Through Recognition: An
Interactionist Interpretation of International Crises”. International Political
Sociology (2011). pp. 68-86
Lindemann separates his chapter in 6 distinct parts. These 6 parts aim at supporting his thesis
statement which is that the peaceful management of international crises depend heavily on the
capacity of actors to engage in politics of recognition. His demonstration will especially use two
particular international crises which are the united-states and Iraq situation 2001-2003 and the
United-States and Libya situation 1991-2004.

He explains this choice because, in the case of Libya and US , peace was preserved whereas in the US
and Iraq, it led to an armed conflict thus it helps understand the presence or absence of politics of
recognition.

Indeed, he draws the common understanding of the reason for the outbreak of a war. Thus, the
utility-maximizing is the common explanation, meaning that actions are right if they are useful or for
the benefice of a majority. Thus, according to this thought, war occur because states defying the
status quo, thus the way things are, are not dissuaded by aggression.

However, Lindemann argue that this may not be the only reason for war and another one could be
the “quest to gain recognition for the identities and norms of respect to which domestic and
international lay claim”. Thus, the peaceful or bellicose end to crises depends on the presence or
absence of a conciliatory policy of recognition: meaning how does one exist through the other’s eyes.
Consequently, when war outbreaks or when a crisis is solved with armed force, it means that policy
considering this other’s face is absent.

Therefore, Lindemann’s first step allows to understand the limits of rational choice models since he
gets away from realist theories enhancing the wish for countries to maximize their share of world
power to evolve towards other theories. Thus, the will to preserve security or to gain profit are not
sufficient anymore to explain the resort to armed conflicts.

About recognition: each country has an asserted image that may differ from how other countries see
them. This can lead to disparities in the way of seeing one actor and, according to Lindemann, the
greater the disparity, the greater the humiliation.

Indeed, humiliation is one reason that can lead to escalating tensions because of the psychological
costs associated to it. The “emotional aspects” can transform into aggressiveness.

1. Then, he wonders whether recognition result from an “abusive personalization of the state”,
which can be explained by the Westphalian myth where the state is sacred and defined as
the best possible system. It also protects rights, sovereignty and therefore identity. So,
countries governed under this Westphalian system where put forward and expect to occupy
a prominent place within international relations.

2. Then, he questions this recognition in international crises and the “vulnerability” factor, thus
the fear for survival or identity. Legitimacy constraints on political decision makers can be
exploited by other states to avoid an armed aggression. Thus, recognition is deeply
connected with legitimacy and can prevent an armed conflict from happening. Vulnerability

1
International Relations 06/10/2021

can also be applied to identity in which case the offended actor accepts at least the
autonomous existence, one component of the politics of recognition, of the offending actor.

3. Moreover, what may also influence whether a conflict is solved through armed forces is
about “political support” because recognition is likely to appease domestic opinion and
domestic opinion goes with political support. Since decision makers generally want to stay in
power, they need to have that political support. Thus, lindemann uses the example of
opinion polls which aim at showing the domestic opinion about whether conflicts should be
peaceful or bellicose.

4. Finally, Lindemann uses the term “conciliatory recognition” which entails the concept of
concessions to try to prevent escalation of action-reaction (restraint, control of military
measures…)

--

PRESENTATION
I. Yugoslavia, a unique context for the 20th century
A. A multi ethnic nation under the same identity

- 36% of population feeling like part of a Yugoslavian identity

- Education = one of the most important means of identity formation
- Brotherhood, sense of community = principles of Yugoslavian identity
- Death Tito = executive power given to multiethnic committee

B. Ethnicity as a factor of tensions

- Problems as they don’t recognize each other as having the same culture → they didn’t share
the same culture
- Primordialist approach:
- Othering: destruction of religious site
- Discrimination: became part of everyday life, determines limits of who is inside/ outside this
community
→ e.g., Slovenians towards the important part in the GDP considering their small population

II. Instrumentalization of identities

A. A political strategy based on ethnicities

- Usurpation of power by elites

- Ethnicity-based identities not conflictual as such
- Ethnic-based nationalism: Serbian leader Milosevic developed Serbian ultra-nationalism,
intensifying the conflicts with other republics, symbol of Serbian nationalism (ethnic pride of
belonging to such minority)
- Serbs, Croats and Muslims used to manage cohabiting before but then, play upon religious
differences (religious beliefs as a central marker of ethnic identity and thus division)
- “Muslim party of democratic action”: Muslim society where Serbs and Croats as non-Muslims
are seen as second class citizens

B. The end of plurinationalism

2
International Relations 06/10/2021

- False idea that identity-based conflicts are inevitable due to the impossibility to unite so
many (supposedly) ethnically different people
- Failure of international intervention (Dayton agreements: marking the end of the inter-ethnic
wars inside Bosnia Herzegovina territory, legitimization of ethnicity as a criteria to divide the
Yugoslav state)

--

LECTURE
INTRODUCTION

How to comprehend international decisions and behavior?

 Classic paradigm: states act rationally to maximize their national interest (= security and
material resources)

 Mearsheimer (Realist) : international actors act on the international scene in order “to
maximize their share of power”

 International liberalism brought some nuances (ex. Limited rationality of international actors
and states; the fight between national interests is not a zero-sum game)

→ Another variable (other than security & material profits), often ignored: identities

OUTLINE

I. Definitions
II. The ethnicization of the world: a cause of instability
III. The dangers of the political instrumentalization of identities
IV. Beyond ethnicization recognition

--

1. A. What is an identity?
IDENTITY
→ Essentialism (believed that identities were intrinsic to people, born with certain attributes that
made us who we are) vs. social construction (more & more accepted from a sociological perspective,
we are not born with identities but socially constructed and acquired)
→ The product of a process of distinction (result of the definition of oneself compared to the others:
imaginary line drawn between us and the rest of the world)
→ Individual and collective strategy (strategy because it’s a way of defining ourself, individual in the
sense that you define yourself but, in order to do so, you will identify yourself inside other groups)

→ main function of identity structure your behavior in a certain context (collective one)
e.g., American Jewish who travels around the world: you present yourself as an American and act as
such. But if you enter a synagogue, you’re not going to act like an American. Thus identities are
volatile because they fluctuate.

B. What is a culture?
CULTURE
→ Clifford Geertz, culture is a “shared system of meaning”, means that culture is a shared way of
comprehending the realiy and society that enables a determined group to understand each other.

3
International Relations 06/10/2021

→ Relayed by history, and inherited conceptions and symbols

→ ≠Values

C. What is the difference between an ethnical group and a nation?

Ethnic group:
→ “those human groups that entertain a subjective belief in their common descent” Max Weber
→ Common attributes (language, culture, traditions…) + the belief they belong to a common group +
do not necessarily has the will to have a political status

Nation:
→ “imagined political community imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign” Benedict
Anderson
→ Common attributes + belief they belong to a same nation + a (or the will of) independent political
existence/ status

e.g., Gypsies, Bedouins: don’t have a will to have a political existence

while Kurds, Tibetans have this will.

2. A. The ethnicization of the world

Ethnicization: process through which ethnical divisions become more and more important and
through which identities become a more structuring variable.

Why are we going through an ethnicization o the world? Why are identities becoming more
and more prominent?

- The decline of ideologies: when they were strong, societies were mainly structured around
(gave a meaning to people’s life), after Cold-War: individuals started to return to sub-parts
(religious, ethnic, regional identities)

The 5 dynamics:

- The weakening of institutions: strong institutions unify the people (belief in the legitimacy of
the institutions), so people starting to turn back elsewhere
- The decline of Empires (and big wholes): when the whole is strong, the identities are
“captured” and “tied”. E.g., After Tito with Milosevic, automatic mechanism: nationalist
movements started to grow
- Lack of integration: tend to believe that the state does not care about them so tend to turn
towards other identities.
- Globalization: access to many cultural elements with more & more communication/
technologies

B. Identity crisis
Factor of instability:

*The Westphalian system established an equilibrium (in terms of identity) with the nation-state
model

*Nation-state: the political institution (the state) coincides with the nation (1 state=1nation)

*Gellner, each nation has its “political roof”

4
International Relations 06/10/2021

→ impossible to create a perfect system in which each nation has a state. But, overall, we hold kind
of a world equilibrium in terms of identity, made of inter-state system. Today, with the resurgence
of other identities: the system is falling apart.

Identity crisis: (in IR) characterized by the fact that the nation, the “imagined community”
(Anderson), doesn’t match the reality/ borders of identities anymore today.
= the feeling of belonging to a nation is declining/ challenged by other identities.
→ e.g., Iraq built as a nation-state. Today, Iraqi feeling of belonging challenged by other identities:
religious attachment (Suni, Shiite, Kurd), pledge allegiance to foreign powers (Iran/ US)

This is a cause of instability: built a world in which people could coexist more or less peacefully. The
nation-state system in a away contains the identity competition. Now they are multiplied and do not
correspond to political institutions anymore = complexification.
→ 2 nations with 2 governments representing each a nation: if there is a problem, the 2 rulers are
going to negotiate. But, if it is with Shiite & Sunni: much more complicated (no institutions)
→ identities are not territorialized anymore: more difficult for them to cohabite (nation-state
equilibrium turned upside down)

SUMMARY:
*The nation-state model is challenged and there are complex overlapping identities
*The world is shaped by unterritorialized and diffuse identities
*It increases the risks of conflicts between identities

3. A. The identity entrepreneurs

Identities are social constructs, malleable. Nation and the national feeling of belonging:
product of a political process (+ history), of a certain education, discourses, symbols, etc.
Today, we do not only have states try to forge this feeling but a broad range of identity
entrepreneurs.

Identity entrepreneurs: political actors using or instrumentalizing identity issues to reach their goals/
political aims.

What kind of aims can be reached through the uses of identity…

→ To reinforce a political power
e.g., Erdogan in Turkey with Islamic identity (since the rejection of Turkey from EU, he uses the
Islamic identity to reinforce his power, transformed the Saint-Sophie into a mosque)
Habyarimana in Rwanda uses the opposition between Hutus and the Tutsis to reinforce his power.

→ Legitimize an organization or a leader

e.g., Hamas in Gaza (Palestinian territory) use both the Palestinian and the Islamic identities, PKK
which is the Kurd party, separatist parties use the regional identities to legitimize their existence

→ To legitimize a protest (especially in authoritarian regimes, identities are very powerful tools)
e.g., Islamic revolution of Iran 1979, identity used to mobilize the people and legitimize the protest
against the authoritarian regime of the Shah

Frustration: very helpful, if individuals are fully satisfied by their identity, they are not going to feel
the need to go towards others. If there is a lot of resentment, then you give the tools for identity
entrepreneurs.

B. The risks of the instrumentalization of identities

5
International Relations 06/10/2021

Dangerous for the “designated enemy” – case of Rwanda and the genocide of the Tutsi 1994
→ 100.000 people killed in 100 days

The identity entrepreneurs are going to try to territorialize identities (= the risk of ethnic cleansing)

Increasing risk of conflict between identities (ex. Sahel) → risk of overlapping of identities (compete
for the same people and same territories)

4. A. Recognition: a variable of international decisions

SUMMARY OF THE READING:

Lindemann Thomas. “Peace through recognition: an interactionist interpretation of international

crises”. International Political Sociology, University of Lille II, CERAPS.

- Insufficiency of classic models : security and profit are not the only variables explaining war
- “I consider that security fears alone are not the only reason that leads state decision
makers into an international crisis. The quest for recognition can also be a factor.”
- Recognition: “an inter-subjective relation constructed through rapport between an actor’s
asserted image and the image returned by others”.
- 2 cases: Iraq/US and Libya/US

B. Vectors of recognition or denial of recognition

Recognition of existence, e.g.;

 S.Hussein’s reaction to 9/11 vs. Kaddafi’s reaction

 Resurgence of violence after the Israeli army entered the Esplanade of the Mosque in
Jerusalem

Recognition of a positive face: “leaving the opponent with an honorable way out”.
→ e.g., negotiation = if you propose something humiliating and pose it as a ultimatum, the other
one does not have the choice (either he’s humiliated or breaks the proposition)

Recognition of particular identities: respect for cultures/memories/religions

--

DEBATE
→ Topic: the European identity
Question 1: Do you think there is “European identity”? Is there a European nation?
Question 2: Do you think we can build a (stronger) “European identity”? How? Should we?

A few facts…

Gellner, 2 indicators:

- Common culture: in the EU, different languages, historical paths, customs…

- The will to be recognized as a group: in the EU, lack of feeling of belonging

→ If an identity is a social construct…

6
International Relations 06/10/2021

*A European identity could by reinforced by education

*Emphasize on common history and values
*Create symbols

Question 3: Do you think “regional identities” (“latin american identity”, “Arabic world”)
exist and do you think they are beneficial ?

--

MIDTERM – METHODOLOGY AND TIPS

DEMONSTRATION: coherent argumentation to demonstrate something

ANNOUNCED IN THE INTRODUCTION

1. Research question → Your essay must be a response to this question you elaborated
2. Thesis statement → Claim something, take a stand-point and defend it through your
essay
3. Outline → Coherent organization of your arguments to back up your statement

WE CAN SPEND 1 HOUR FOR THE DRAFT !!!

RELEVANCE OF THE USE OF KNOWLEDGE

- Select the relevant elements

- ≠ overwhelm your essay (lose clarity; it’s not a demonstration anymore ; lose the points of
the ability to select the relevant information)

SPECIFY AND DEFINE

- Short and synthetic definition of the concepts / theories you use

- ≠ throw out names and key concepts

QUALITY OVER QUANTITY: Fewer but well defined and relevantly mobilized concepts and examples
are better than 10 blurred references

QUALITY OF WRITING: Use short sentences

QUALITY OF THE STRUCTURE:

- Explain, synthetically, at the beginning of every paragraph what are you going to present

1 paragraph = 1 argument:
- Idea: summarize the argument
- Theory / author
- Example

INCLUDED: session 1 to session 6, very large IR questions (do not correspond to one specific lecture)
so very important that we narrow the topic (how we are going to emphasize the topic, impossible to
treat all the aspects of the topic), nuance the claims but do not forget to defend something (one of
the 2 points of view is stronger than the other)