Dejustification and Dispute Settlement

Irredentism in European Politics

Dados Bibliográficos

ID7770918
AutoresMarkus Kornprobst (0000-0002-4544-0574, Department of Political Science, University College London, UK, autor correspondente)
Ano2007
Volume13
Fascículo4
Páginas459-487
Data de publicação2007-12-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoEuropean Journal of International Relations (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1354-0661 • E-ISSN: 1460-3713
EditoraSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/1354066107083143
OpenAlexW2039297480
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas7
Referências citadas52

Irredentism developed into an anomaly in post-World War II Europe and — contradicting the dire predictions of the 1990s — has remained an anomaly even since the end of the Cold War. Focusing on the renunciation of the FRG's and the Republic of Ireland's irredentist claims, I propose a novel route to analyse dispute settlement. I contend that nations justify their stance in a conflict. In the case of irredentism, they do not merely assert that a disputed territory is their land but justify to themselves and others why the disputed territory is rightfully theirs and why pursuing the irredentist stance is worthwhile. The disruption of this justification — what I call dejustification — constitutes a pathway to dispute settlement. Dejustification occurs through a change of the ideational environment that serves as the resource for justifying the claim and an advocacy that constructs a mismatch between environment and claim

Economics · Law and economics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Renunciation · Sociology · Territorial dispute · European Union Policy and Governance · Law · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Post-Soviet Geopolitical Dynamics