Downloads/Method Ranking Outcome 2009 A4.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DELIBERATIVE CAPACITY IN POST-SOVIET TRANSITION: EFFECTS OF COLOUR REVOLUTIONS, INSTITUTIONAL DESIGN AND INTERNATIONAL DISCOURSES ON INTER-CULTURAL RELATIONS IN UKRAINE AND GEORGIA by ANASTASIYA SALNYKOVA MA, Central European University, 2007 MA, Simon Fraser University, 2006 BA, Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, 2004 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Political Science) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) February 2015 © Anastasiya Salnykova, 2015 ABSTRACT This dissertation explores the issue of deliberative capacity in the context of inter-cultural relations in the democratizing post-Soviet states of Ukraine and Georgia. Specifically, it enquires about (1) the effect of deliberative capacity on inter-cultural relations, (2) the factors that affect deliberative capacity itself, and (3) the extent to which implementing deliberative democratic models is feasible in the context of post-Soviet Ukraine. It is argued that both ethnic studies and democratic transition studies significantly benefit from the application of the deliberative democracy approach. Based on the application of this approach, this work suggests three further arguments. First, deliberative capacity is the underlying feature of a multitude of ethnic mobilization theories. It suggests that instead of treating the different factors of ethnic conflict as competing, they can be looked at as each illuminating a different form or aspect of the deliberative capacity in a specific case. This dissertation suggests that such an overarching explanation simultaneously provides a more comprehensive and parsimonious story of ethnic radicalization while, usually, nuanced complexity and parsimony are at odds in theory building. Second, this study argues that a variety of factors that influence deliberative capacity affect its various components in different ways. It follows that factors of deliberative capacity are not necessarily entirely positive or negative. Instead, certain factors may create mixed effects on deliberative capacity by facilitating some of its features while jeopardizing the others. This is illustrated with the examples of such factors as colour revolutions, institutional design and the international national minority regime. Third, this dissertation draws attention to the existence of different kinds of deliberative systems that create very different contexts for politics and policies. This dissertation also explored the difficulties of applying the deliberative model in Ukraine and found that it is as difficult as it is necessary. These difficulties are nevertheless counterbalanced by a number of opportunities, and several deliberation precedents. Finally, the work formulates practical recommendations for national ethnic policy-makers, institutional designers, deliberation experiments developers, and international actors, that are expected to increase the level of deliberative capacity and thereby the level of inter-cultural peace. ii PREFACE This dissertation is an original intellectual product of the author, Anastasiya Salnykova. The fieldwork reported in this dissertation was covered by UBC Ethics Certificate number H09-02882 issued by the Behavioral Research Ethics Board. Versions on chapters 5 and 6 of this dissertation have been published. Salnykova, Anastasiya (2014) “Barriers to Intergroup Deliberation in Divided Ukraine”, in Deliberation in Divided Societies: A Case-Study and Cross-Sectional Analysis, ed. by Juan Ugarizza and Didier Caluwaerts, Palgrave Macmillan. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................................................... ii PREFACE ........................................................................................................................................................................ iii TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................................................. viii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................................ ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................................................. x DEDICATION .................................................................................................................................................................. xi INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................. 1 Key Puzzle and Research Questions .......................................................................................................................... 2 Academic Contribution .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Theoretical Stance ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 Core Argument .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Significance: Normative and Practical ....................................................................................................................... 8 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................... 10 Structure .................................................................................................................................................................. 12 1. CASES: CULTURAL DIVERSITY IN UKRAINE AND GEORGIA ....................................................................................... 13 1.1. Ethnic Identities and Policies in Ukraine .......................................................................................................... 14 1.1.1. Mapping Ethno-Cultural Identities in Ukraine .......................................................................................... 14 1.1.2. Nuances and Complexities of Ukraine’s Ethno-cultural Map .................................................................... 15 1.1.3. Ethno-cultural Claims ................................................................................................................................ 22 1.1.4. Tracing Ethnic Policy in Post-Soviet Ukraine ............................................................................................. 28 1.1.5. Salience of Ethno-Cultural Identity in Ukraine .......................................................................................... 34 1.2. Ethnic Identities and Policies in Georgia .......................................................................................................... 35 1.2.1 Relations with Abkhazians ......................................................................................................................... 35 1.2.2. Relations with South Ossetians ................................................................................................................. 37 1.2.3. Relations with Other Minority Groups ...................................................................................................... 38 1.2.4. Georgia’s Ethnic Policy .............................................................................................................................. 39 1.3. Contrasting Georgia and Ukraine ..................................................................................................................... 42 iv 2. DEVELOPING KEY ARGUMENTS: LITERATURE ON DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY, ETHNOCULTURAL IDENTITY AND FACTORS AFFECTING THEM IN APPLICATION TO THE CASES ...................................................................................... 43 2.1 Deliberative Democracy .................................................................................................................................... 44 2.2 Cultural Identity and Cultural Claims ................................................................................................................. 49 2.3 Transition ........................................................................................................................................................... 52 2.4 Deliberative Systems Approach ......................................................................................................................... 52 2.4.1 Benefits of Deliberative System Approach ................................................................................................. 54 2.4.2 Object of Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 56 2.4.3 Functions of a Deliberative System ............................................................................................................ 56 2.4.4 Barriers to Deliberative System ................................................................................................................