Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7991574 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Prajakti Kalra (0000-0002-6193-7468, University of Cambridge, corresponding author), Saxena (0000-0002-6321-5629, Cavendish Hospital) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 103-112 |
| Publication date | 2021-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Eurasian Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1879-3665 • E-ISSN: 1879-3673 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/18793665211044839 |
| OpenAlex | W3203636975 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 17 |
The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) and more generally the countries of Eurasia and the Caucasus as inherently fragile states which are politically unstable and thus on the brink of collapse. This article also seeks to question narratives of modernity that are singular and constantly out of reach for large swathes of the world’s populations because of the narrowness and hegemonic nature of the architecture of global governance. By carefully considering the ways and means through which international institutions categorize countries as fragile and/or failed, the article aims to provide the theoretical foreground for the special issue which focuses on locating inherent community resilience strategies. We explain how the non-participatory norm making behavior of international organizations privilege certain actors, largely the Global North, and simultaneously ignore the majority of Eurasian states. In other words, a demand predicated in the linear evaluation of institutions and norms dictated by global institutions clash with the Eurasian model of inherent complex adaptive capability and introduce fragility. The focus thus is on understanding the ‘local’ based on the historical analysis of development in the region, nodal points of urban development and community life, forms of social capital, and community resilience strategies in the wider Eurasian region
Citizen journalism · Development economics · Economic geography · Economics · Fragility · Geography · Hegemony · Narrative · Norm (philosophy · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Underpinning · Law · Political Conflict and Governance · Post-Communist Economic and Political Transition · Russia and Soviet political economy
The Case for Science Diplomacy in Mongol Eurasia
Introduction to Special Issue
Critical minerals and the shaping of Central Asian economies through the ages
Locating Central Eurasia’s inherent resilience
Preconditions, driving forces, and contradictions of integration of post-Soviet states in the Eurasian Economic Union
The Chinggisid restoration in Central Asia
Before the West
Protective Integration and Security Policy Coordination
Pax Mongolica
The Steppe Tradition in International Relations
Silent partners
Fragile States’
International Organisations and the Production of Hegemonic Knowledge
State fragility and failure as wicked problems
Fictional States & Atomized Public Spheres
Central Europe as Ground Zero of the New International Order
Non-western visions of regionalism
Kant, Mill, and Illiberal Legacies in International Affairs
Commodities, merchants, and refugees
Liberal internationalism
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2021 - 2025 (5) |
| Highly cited | No |