DOCSLIB.ORG

In Arlington, VA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In Arlington, VA The Politics of Border Walls in Hungary, Georgia and Israel Gela Merabishvili Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Planning, Governance and Globalization Gerard Toal Giselle Datz Joel Peters Susan Allen 22 September 2020 Arlington, VA Keywords: Borders, Nationalism, Security, Geopolitics, Hungary, Israel, Georgia Copyright 2020 Gela Merabishvili The Politics of Border Walls in Hungary, Georgia and Israel Gela Merabishvili ABSTRACT Politicians justify border walls by arguing that it would protect the nation from outside threats, such as immigration or terrorism. The literature on border walls has identified xenophobic nationalism’s centrality in framing border walls as a security measure. Yet, alternative geographic visions of nationhood in Hungary, Georgia and Israel define the fenced perimeters in these countries as the lines that divide the nation and its territory. These cases illustrate the contradiction between the geography of security, marked by the border wall, and the geography of nationhood, which extends beyond the fenced boundary. These cases allow us to problematize the link between “security” and “nationalism” and their relationship with borders. Therefore, this dissertation is a study of the politics of reconciling distinct geopolitical visions of security and nationhood in the making of border walls. Justification of border walls requires the reframing of the national territory in line with the geography articulated by border security and away from the spatially expanded vision of nationhood. A successful reframing of the nation’s geography is a matter of politicians’ skills to craft a convincing geopolitical storyline in favor of the border wall that would combine security and nationalist arguments (Hungary). However, even the most skillful rhetoricians will find it hard to create such a discursive story if the hegemonic geography of nationhood has firmly fixed the meaning of the fenced line not as a border but as a dividing line across the nation’s geo-body (Georgia). Where such hegemonic geography of nationhood is absent and the society disagrees over the meaning, shape and location of borders and territory, a security discourse in favor of the border wall would sway the public opinion towards that type of territorial conception of nationhood, which overlaps with the promise of protection (Israel). The Politics of Border Walls in Hungary, Georgia and Israel Gela Merabishvili GENERAL AUDIENCE ABSTRACT Politicians justify border walls by arguing that it would protect the nation from outside threats, such as immigration or terrorism. This study shows that the new border walls do not necessarily mean the rise of nationalism. Instead, the nationalism associated with border walls has sidelined and replaced other forms of nationalism that aim to keep the border open and expand the state’s reach beyond the sovereign boundaries. In Hungary, Georgia and Israel, new border walls serve the purpose of security. Simultaneously, they separate the country from the areas beyond the fenced line but are considered part of the national territory. This study accounts for the political process that aims to reconcile these territorial contradictions between the quest for border security and the nationalist desire to maintain power beyond the border wall. The study has found that such a dual functioning of the borders has been possible in Hungary and Israel. In contrast, in Georgia, the fence remains a deeply negative symbol of the nation’s territorial division. Table of Contents 1. Introduction_______________________________________________________________________________ 1 2. Theory & Methods__________________________________________________________________________6 2.1 Theory_________________________________________________________________________________ 6 2.2 Concepts______________________________________________________________________________ 10 2.3 Case Selection__________________________________________________________________________16 2.4 Methods_______________________________________________________________________________17 Discourse-Analytical Approach to the Study of Politics__________________________________________ 17 Genealogy______________________________________________________________________________18 Discursive-Argumentative Analysis_________________________________________________________ 19 Discourse-Material Analysis_______________________________________________________________ 21 2.5 Data Collection_________________________________________________________________________ 22 3. Hungary’s Southern Border Fence___________________________________________________________ 24 3.1 Introduction____________________________________________________________________________24 3.2 Genealogy of Border_____________________________________________________________________27 Introduction____________________________________________________________________________ 27 Transborder Nationhood from Trianon to Schengen_____________________________________________ 28 Transborder Political Community___________________________________________________________ 35 Border Security_________________________________________________________________________ 41 Conclusion_____________________________________________________________________________ 45 3.3 Politics of Fence________________________________________________________________________ 46 Introduction____________________________________________________________________________ 46 Immigration and the Border: The Emergence of a Political Problem (January-June 2015)_______________ 47 Crafting a Storyline: Danger, Nationhood and the Border Fence (May-July 2015)_____________________ 52 Border Closure/Problem Closure: Rampart Nationhood (September 2015)___________________________ 62 Conclusion_____________________________________________________________________________ 69 3.4 Border Materiality______________________________________________________________________ 70 Introduction____________________________________________________________________________ 70 Border Repertoires_______________________________________________________________________ 71 Transborder Nationhood Materialized________________________________________________________ 74 Sovereignty Materialized__________________________________________________________________ 77 Rampart Nationhood Materialized___________________________________________________________81 Conclusion_____________________________________________________________________________ 84 3.5 Conclusion____________________________________________________________________________ 87 4. Borderization in Georgia____________________________________________________________________91 4.1 Introduction____________________________________________________________________________91 4.2 Genealogy of Border_____________________________________________________________________93 Introduction____________________________________________________________________________ 93 iv Ethno-territorial Border (1989-1992)_________________________________________________________93 Frontier of Statehood and Nationhood (2004-2008)_____________________________________________ 98 The Birth of Borderization (2008-2012)_____________________________________________________ 103 Conclusion____________________________________________________________________________ 109 4.3 Politics of Fence_______________________________________________________________________ 111 Introduction___________________________________________________________________________ 111 “Creeping Occupation” and “Provocation”: The Emerging Storylines of Borderization (2013)__________ 111 “Creeping Annexation” (2014)____________________________________________________________ 119 Consolidation of the Borderization Storylines (2015)___________________________________________ 122 Conclusion____________________________________________________________________________ 125 4.4 Border Materiality_____________________________________________________________________ 127 Introduction___________________________________________________________________________ 127 Creeping Insecurity_____________________________________________________________________ 127 Managing Insecurity & Reproducing Borderization____________________________________________ 130 Bordered Identities and Peripheral Affects: Alternative Meanings of Borderization___________________ 135 The “In-Betweeners”____________________________________________________________________ 140 Conclusion____________________________________________________________________________ 143 4.5 Conclusion___________________________________________________________________________ 144 5. Israel’s Security Fence_____________________________________________________________________147 5.1 Introduction___________________________________________________________________________147 5.2 Genealogy of Border____________________________________________________________________149 Introduction___________________________________________________________________________ 149 Partition (1937-1949)____________________________________________________________________ 150 Occupation (1967-1977)_________________________________________________________________ 154 Separation (1992-2000)__________________________________________________________________ 159 Conclusion____________________________________________________________________________
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Strategic Cyber Deterrence
    STRATEGIC CYBER DETERRENCE A Thesis Presented to the Faculty Of The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy By CHRISTOPHER FITZGERALD WRENN In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy JULY 2012 Dissertation Committee Professor Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr., Chair Professor Antonia H. Chayes Professor William C. Martel UMI Number: 3539954 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI 3539954 Published by ProQuest LLC (2012). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 COLONEL CHRISTOPHER F. WRENN (CHRIS) 26 Pearl Street, Medford, MA, 02155 · 325-864-1515 · [email protected] Education Tufts University, the Fletcher School Medford, MA PhD Candidate, 2009–present Pursuing doctoral study in International Relations. Research topic: Deterrence, cyber deterrence Tufts University, the Fletcher School Medford, MA National Defense Fellow, 2006–2007 Pursued a course of study in areas central to United States national security: nuclear proliferation, counterproliferation, terrorism, crisis management, homeland security, and intelligence. Research topic: Global Salafi jihadist insurgency Air University, Air Command and Staff College Montgomery, AL Master of Military Operational Art and Science, June 2000 Completed a course of study with focus on national security and military studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel's National Religious and the Israeli- Palestinian Conflict
    Leap of Faith: Israel’s National Religious and the Israeli- Palestinian Conflict Middle East Report N°147 | 21 November 2013 International Crisis Group Headquarters Avenue Louise 149 1050 Brussels, Belgium Tel: +32 2 502 90 38 Fax: +32 2 502 50 38 [email protected] Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... i Recommendations..................................................................................................................... iv I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 II. Religious Zionism: From Ascendance to Fragmentation ................................................ 5 A. 1973: A Turning Point ................................................................................................ 5 B. 1980s and 1990s: Polarisation ................................................................................... 7 C. The Gaza Disengagement and its Aftermath ............................................................. 11 III. Settling the Land .............................................................................................................. 14 A. Bargaining with the State: The Kookists ................................................................... 15 B. Defying the State: The Hilltop Youth ........................................................................ 17 IV. From the Hills to the State ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2018-2019 წლების ანგარიში/Annual Report
    რელიგიის საკითხთა STATE AGENCY FOR სახელმწიფო სააგენტო RELIGIOUS ISSUES 2018-2019 წლების ანგარიში/ANNUAL REPORT 2020 თბილისი TBILISI წინამდებარე გამოცემაში წარმოდგენილია რელიგიის საკითხთა სახელმწიფო სააგე- ნტოს მიერ 2018-2019 წლებში გაწეული საქმიანობის ანგარიში, რომელიც მოიცავს ქვეყა- ნაში რელიგიის თავისუფლების კუთხით არსებული ვითარების ანალიზს და იმ ძირითად ღონისძიებებს, რასაც სააგენტო ქვეყანაში რელიგიის თავისუფლების, შემწყნარებლური გარემოს განმტკიცებისთვის ახორციელებს. ანგარიშში განსაკუთრებული ყურადღებაა გამახვილებული საქართველოს ოკუპირებულ ტერიტორიებზე, სადაც ნადგურდება ქართული ეკლესია-მონასტრები და უხეშად ირღვე- ვა მკვიდრი მოსახლეობის უფლებები რელიგიის, გამოხატვისა და გადაადგილების თავი- სუფლების კუთხით. ანგარიშში მოცემულია ინფორმაცია სააგენტოს საქმიანობაზე „ადამიანის უფლებების დაცვის სამთავრობო სამოქმედო გეგმის“ ფარგლებში, ასევე ასახულია სახელმწიფოს მხრი- დან რელიგიური ორგანიზაციებისათვის გაწეული ფინანსური თუ სხვა სახის დახმარება და განხორციელებული პროექტები. This edition presents a report on the activities carried out by the State Agency for Religious Is- sues in 2018-2019, including analysis of the situation in the country regarding freedom of religion and those main events that the Agency is conducting to promote freedom of religion and a tolerant environment. In the report, particular attention is payed to the occupied territories of Georgia, where Georgian churches and monasteries are destroyed and the rights of indigenous peoples are severely violated in terms of freedom of religion, expression and movement. The report provides information on the Agency's activities within the framework of the “Action Plan of the Government of Georgia on the Protection of Human Rights”, as well as financial or other assistance provided by the state to religious organizations and projects implemented. რელიგიის საკითხთა სახელმწიფო სააგენტო 2018-2019 წლების ანგარიში სარჩევი 1. რელიგიისა და რწმენის თავისუფლება ოკუპირებულ ტერიტორიებზე ........................ 6 1.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Hybrid Tactics in Georgia
    Russian Hybrid Tactics in Georgia Niklas Nilsson SILK ROAD PAPER January 2018 Russian Hybrid Tactics in Georgia Niklas Nilsson © Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program – A Joint Transatlantic Research and Policy Center American Foreign Policy Council, 509 C St NE, Washington D.C. Institute for Security and Development Policy, V. Finnbodavägen 2, Stockholm-Nacka, Sweden www.silkroadstudies.org “Russian Hybrid Tactics in Georgia” is a Silk Road Paper published by the Central Asia- Caucasus Institute and Silk Road Studies Program, Joint Center. The Silk Road Papers Series is the Occasional Paper series of the Joint Center, and addresses topical and timely subjects. The Joint Center is a transatlantic independent and non-profit research and policy center. It has offices in Washington and Stockholm and is affiliated with the American Foreign Policy Council and the Institute for Security and Development Policy. It is the first institution of its kind in Europe and North America, and is firmly established as a leading research and policy center, serving a large and diverse community of analysts, scholars, policy-watchers, business leaders, and journalists. The Joint Center is at the forefront of research on issues of conflict, security, and development in the region. Through its applied research, publications, research cooperation, public lectures, and seminars, it functions as a focal point for academic, policy, and public discussion regarding the region. The opinions and conclusions expressed in this study are those of
    [Show full text]
  • United Nations International Meeting in Support of Israeli-Palestinian Peace
    UNITED NATIONS INTERNATIONAL MEETING IN SUPPORT OF ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE The two-State solution: a key prerequisite for achieving peace and stability in the Middle East Moscow, 1 and 2 July 2015 CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY PLENARY II International efforts to achieve the two-State solution Paper presented by Ms. Alla Shainskaya Member, Executive Committee and Presidium of the Congress of Meretz Party Tel Aviv CPR/IM/2015/12 2 Honorable Chairperson, Excellences – Ambassadors, Distinguished Delegates, Firstly, let me express my warm sentiments of gratitude for being invited to this UN forum, and for the opportunity to speak to you from this challenging podium. It is a great honor to me. Let me introduce myself. I am a scientist, an immigrant from the Former Soviet Union, from South – East of Ukraine. I am not a politician, but from my first steps in Israel, I was and still is a dedicated member of Israeli left camp. In a year 2003 I was a part of Israeli delegation in Geneva where the Geneva Accord was presented and symbolically signed by two sites. This agreement was and is the most detailed and practically most welcome by both sides, as we heard yesterday in excellent talk by Mr. Nidal Foqaha. It is hard to describe by words the atmosphere and the excitement of people during this only ONE day of the virtual peace! At this day we did not know yet, that Geneva Accord, like many others that followed and preceded it, like Clinton Parameters and Annapolis Agreement, The Road Map etc. will become a memory.
    [Show full text]
  • Building a Protective Wall Around Terrorists
    Fordham International Law Journal Volume 28, Issue 3 2004 Article 10 Building a Protective Wall Around Terrorists – How the International Court of Justice’s Ruling in The Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory Made the World Safer for Terrorists and More Dangerous for Member States of the United Nations Rebecca Kahan∗ ∗ Copyright c 2004 by the authors. Fordham International Law Journal is produced by The Berke- ley Electronic Press (bepress). http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj Building a Protective Wall Around Terrorists – How the International Court of Justice’s Ruling in The Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory Made the World Safer for Terrorists and More Dangerous for Member States of the United Nations Rebecca Kahan Abstract Part I of this Note will examine two recent actions in the war against international terror- ism: the Israeli plan to build a separation barrier between Israel and the OPT, and the invasion of Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom. Part II will discuss two important deviations by the ICJ from past interpretation of international law that were announced in the advisory proceed- ings against Israel: a new elucidation by the ICJ regarding principles of judicial propriety and a new analysis of the abilities of States to act in self-defense under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter. Part III will address the impact on the international community’s fight against terrorism, and the role of the ICJ as an international entity. BUILDING A PROTECTIVE WALL AROUND TERRORISTS HOW THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE'S RULING IN THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WALL IN THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY MADE THE WORLD SAFER FOR TERRORISTS AND MORE DANGEROUS FOR MEMBER STATES OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rebecca Kahan* INTRODUCTION The nature of the threats posed to States has changed since the adoption of the U.N.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel-Palestine Through the Lens of Game Theory
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Economics Department Working Paper Series Economics 2021 Land for peace? Israel-Palestine through the lens of game theory Amal Ahmad Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/econ_workingpaper Part of the Economics Commons Recommended Citation Ahmad, Amal, "Land for peace? Israel-Palestine through the lens of game theory" (2021). Economics Department Working Paper Series. 301. https://doi.org/10.7275/21792057 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Economics at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Economics Department Working Paper Series by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Land for peace? Israel-Palestine through the lens of game theory Amal Ahmad∗ February 2021 Abstract Why have Israel and the Palestinians failed to implement a \land for peace" solution, along the lines of the Oslo Accords? This paper studies the applica- tion of game theory to this question. I show that existing models of the conflict largely rely on unrealistic assumptions about what the main actors are trying to achieve. Specifically, they assume that Israel is strategically interested in withdrawing from the occupied territories pending resolvable security concerns but that it is obstructed from doing so by violent Palestinians with other objec- tives. I use historical analysis along with bargaining theory to shed doubt on this assumption, and to argue that the persistence of conflict has been aligned with, not contrary to, the interests of the militarily powerful party, Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • Palestinian Economic Development: Israeli Actions in Light of the 1994 Paris Protocol and International Economic Law Vincent El Hayek
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Minnesota Journal of International Law 2015 Palestinian Economic Development: Israeli Actions in Light of the 1994 Paris Protocol and International Economic Law Vincent El Hayek Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mjil Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Hayek, Vincent El, "Palestinian Economic Development: Israeli Actions in Light of the 1994 Paris Protocol and International Economic Law" (2015). Minnesota Journal of International Law. 286. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mjil/286 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Minnesota Journal of International Law collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Palestinian Economic Development: Israeli Actions in Light of the 1994 Paris Protocol and International Economic Law Vincent El Hayek In 1993, Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization signed the Oslo Accords,' starting a peace process that was meant to end with a Palestinian State. The Oslo Accords were only the start of numerous agreements, including the 1994 Gaza-Jericho Agreement, which became Annex IV to the Accords, commonly known as the Paris Protocol.2 The Paris Protocol laid out the framework for what was to be the economic relationship between Israel and a Palestinian state. Its writers recognized the importance that stability and growth in the Palestinian economy had for any hope of a lasting peace. 3 As such, they developed a strategy which hinged on four "pillars" for Palestinian economic development: 11] International aid; [2] close Israeli-Palestinian economic relations; [3] foreign and private investment; and [4] access to foreign markets for Palestinian exports.4 When the Paris Protocol was first signed, excitement was high.
    [Show full text]
  • Sociographie De La Doxa Coloniale Israélienne
    Université de Montréal Se représenter dominant et victime : sociographie de la doxa coloniale israélienne par Michaël Séguin Département de sociologie Faculté des arts et sciences Thèse présentée en vue de l’obtention du grade de Philosophiae Doctor (Ph.D.) en sociologie Août 2018 © Michaël Séguin, 2018 Université de Montréal Faculté des études supérieures et postdoctorales Cette thèse intitulée : Se représenter dominant et victime : sociographie de la doxa coloniale israélienne Présentée par : Michaël Séguin a été évaluée par un jury composé des personnes suivantes : Deena White, présidente-rapporteuse et représentante du doyen Paul Sabourin, directeur de recherche Yakov Rabkin, codirecteur de recherche Barbara Thériault, membre du jury Rachad Antonius, examinateur externe Résumé Dans un monde majoritairement postcolonial, Israël fait figure d’exception alors même que se perpétue sa domination d’un autre peuple, les Arabes palestiniens. Tandis qu’un nombre grandissant d’auteurs, y compris juifs, traitent de la question israélo-palestinienne comme d’un colonialisme de peuplement, et non plus comme d’un conflit ethnique entre groupes nationaux, se pose la question : comment une telle domination est-elle possible à l’ère des médias de masse ? Plus précisément, pourquoi cette domination est-elle si peu contestée de l’intérieur de la société israélienne alors même qu’elle contredit le discours public de l’État qui tente, par tous les moyens, de se faire accepter comme étant démocratique et éclairé ? Pour y répondre, cette thèse procède à une analyse de la connaissance de sens commun israélienne afin de détecter à la fois le mode de connaissance, issu des relations sociales, privilégié pour faire sens des rapports ethnonationaux, mais aussi la manière dont cette doxa vient légitimer la domination des Palestiniens.
    [Show full text]
  • Radicalization of the Settlers' Youth: Hebron As a Hub for Jewish Extremism
    © 2014, Global Media Journal -- Canadian Edition Volume 7, Issue 1, pp. 69-85 ISSN: 1918-5901 (English) -- ISSN: 1918-591X (Français) Radicalization of the Settlers’ Youth: Hebron as a Hub for Jewish Extremism Geneviève Boucher Boudreau University of Ottawa, Canada Abstract: The city of Hebron has been a hub for radicalization and terrorism throughout the modern history of Israel. This paper examines the past trends of radicalization and terrorism in Hebron and explains why it is still a present and rising ideology within the Jewish communities and organization such as the Hilltop Youth movement. The research first presents the transmission of social memory through memorials and symbolism of the Hebron hills area and then presents the impact of Meir Kahana’s movement. As observed, Hebron slowly grew and spread its population and philosophy to the then new settlement of Kiryat Arba. An exceptionally strong ideology of an extreme form of Judaism grew out of those two small towns. As analyzed—based on an exhaustive ethnographic fieldwork and bibliographic research—this form of fundamentalism and national-religious point of view gave birth to a new uprising of violence and radicalism amongst the settler youth organizations such as the Hilltop Youth movement. Keywords: Judaism; Radicalization; Settlers; Terrorism; West Bank Geneviève Boucher Boudreau 70 Résumé: Dès le début de l’histoire moderne de l’État d’Israël, les villes d’Hébron et Kiryat Arba sont devenues une plaque tournante pour la radicalisation et le terrorisme en Cisjordanie. Cette recherche examine cette tendance, explique pourquoi elle est toujours d’actualité ainsi qu’à la hausse au sein de ces communautés juives.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Owned Georgia Eng.Pdf
    By Paul Rimple This book is about the businessmen and the companies who own significant shares in broadcasting, telecommunications, advertisement, oil import and distribution, pharmaceutical, privatisation and mining sectors. Furthermore, It describes the relationship and connections between the businessmen and companies with the government. Included is the information about the connections of these businessmen and companies with the government. The book encompases the time period between 2003-2012. At the time of the writing of the book significant changes have taken place with regards to property rights in Georgia. As a result of 2012 Parliamentary elections the ruling party has lost the majority resulting in significant changes in the business ownership structure in Georgia. Those changes are included in the last chapter of this book. The project has been initiated by Transparency International Georgia. The author of the book is journalist Paul Rimple. He has been assisted by analyst Giorgi Chanturia from Transparency International Georgia. Online version of this book is available on this address: http://www.transparency.ge/ Published with the financial support of Open Society Georgia Foundation The views expressed in the report to not necessarily coincide with those of the Open Society Georgia Foundation, therefore the organisation is not responsible for the report’s content. WHO OWNED GEORGIA 2003-2012 By Paul Rimple 1 Contents INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • De Tijd Dringt Kairos Palestina: Een Uitdaging Tot Vrede
    De tijd dringt Kairos Palestina: een uitdaging tot vrede NO WAR NO WALL Want hij is onze vrede, hij die de twee tot één heeft gemaakt en de muur van vijandschap heeft afgebroken (naar Efeziërs 2:14) Student: Carla J.M. Borgers e-mail: [email protected] 13 februari 2019 Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Faculteit der Godgeleerdheid Theology and Religious Studies Masterspecialisatie ‘Peace, Trauma, and Religion’ Begeleiders: Dr. Katja Tolstaja Prof. Dr. Fernando H.H. Enns VERKLARING 1 Hierbij verklaar ik dat deze scriptie een origineel werk is. De scriptie is het resultaat van mijn eigen onderzoek en is alleen door mijzelf geschreven, tenzij anders aangegeven. Als informatie en ideeën uit andere bronnen zijn overgenomen, wordt dat expliciet en volledig vermeld in de tekst of in de noten. Een bibliografie is bijgevoegd. Delden, 13 februari 2019 VERKLARING 2 Hierbij stem ik ermee in dat mijn scriptie na goedkeuring beschikbaar wordt gesteld voor vermenigvuldiging en interbibliothecair leenverkeer, en dat de titel en samenvatting beschikbaar worden gesteld voor externe organisaties en door de Vrije Universiteit mogen worden gepubliceerd. Delden, 13 februari 2019 2 Inhoudsopgave Motivatie ............................................................................................................................................6 1. Inleiding ......................................................................................................................................7 1.1. Relevantie van het onderzoek ..............................................................................................7
    [Show full text]