ERJSSH 3(1), June 2016

ERJSSH 3(1), June 2016 EDITORIAL RUNNING THE ERJSSH: ACHIEVEMENTS, CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS The current issue is the fourth since the ERJSSH was launched in Decem- ber 2014. From then till the present day we have managed to fulfil our ini- tial objective of publishing two journal issues every year following the high- est standards and encompassing relevant, groundbreaking research in the social sciences and the humanities. Until the present twenty one original research articles have been published, which were written by twenty six different authors. The articles cover a wide range of topics within the social sciences and the humanities, from geography and GIS research to psychology, political science, litera- ture, languages, archaeology, and history. Concerning their nationality, Ethiopian authors have dominated, with eighteen scholars from this country having published with us. ERJSSH is thus achieving one of its mis- sions of becoming a serious scholarly platform for young and senior scholars from Ethiopia’s expanding higher education sector. Yet, the journal is also proud to have attracted scholars from other regions, some active in Ethiopia but others also active abroad. Thus, among the foreign nationals represented in our pages are U.S. Americans, Norwegians, Germans, Indi- ans and Nigerians. It is the hope of the ERJSSH editors that foreign scholars will keep contributing with their fair share of manuscripts, along with local scholars, because only in that way the journal will succeed in one of its ambitious goals of being a truly international publication with a general thematic scope, which shall be not bound to topics related to Ethiopia or the Horn of Africa. For the sake of modesty we should not fail in emphasiz- ing these achievements. Publishing a journal of this profile is not an easy task, least in Ethiopia that is, rightly, focusing most of its energies in eco- nomic and industrial development. While the successes must be shared with our readers and authors we must also say a few words about the challenges encountered. An important challenge we are facing is the concurrence from the so-called ‘predator journals’; predator journals are those journals–normally published only online–without a clear academic affiliation, which follow low standards and offer to scholars a quick publication platform in exchange for a typically- high payment fee. The fee is supposed to cover editing costs but this is rarely the case. Many young African authors are lured into these journals for the sake of publishing quickly and thus advancing rapidly in their pro- motion ambitions. It is our hope that the local academic institutions will tackle this problem (for instance by clearly identifying ‘predator’-based articles) as it threatens serious non-for profit journals like ours who, need- less to say it, do not charge any fees for publishing the articles and carry out a sound revision, advising and editing of the manuscripts. Another challenge is the peer reviewing process. At the present we count with a large pool of peer reviewers and, since this is a crucial part of our journal, 1 ERJSSH 3(1), June 2016 we give the utmost attention in getting every paper reviewed twice (sometimes even thrice). Yet, as it has been acknowledged to me by other colleagues, it is not easy neither for ERJSSH nor for other scholarly journals, to bring academics into a job that is non-remunerated. So I take this opportunity to invite local and foreign scholars to join our peer-reviewing ‘team’ and I also want to thank effusively those who have put their invalua- ble expertise, their energies and their time in the service of our journal. Our achievements might appear meagre when compared to other well- established journals at home and abroad, but they set for us a solid base from which to further continue the work and our commitment for publishing sound, innovative and interesting scholarly work. Of course, there is still a long way ahead. We need to learn new things from well-established journals that have their own publishing traditions and that are also able to innovate. We also need to improve in several areas, such as upgrading the webpage, gaining more authors from disciplines not yet covered, and making ERJSSH better known. It is our conviction that a journal like ERJSSH can positively contribute to the current development of the country. On the one hand, the research published at ERJSSH can provide expertise and advice on key societal topics, such as agriculture, environment, population dynamics, languages, and psychosocial problems. On the other hand, the study of Ethiopia’s rich cultures and of its dynamic history can help in policy-making and also in buttressing key development sectors of the econ- omy such as tourism and heritage management. We are confident that, with the active support of the University of Gondar and of the College of Social Sciences and the Humanities, we will be able to keep up to the standards set for the coming future and support Ethiopia in its way for- ward as one of Africa’s leading nations. Andreu Martínez Managing editor 2 ERJSSH 3(1), June 2016 RESEARCH ARTICLE KNOWING SUICIDE TERRORISM? TRACING EPISTEMIC VIOLENCE ACROSS SCHOLARLY EXPERTISE Claudia Brunner1 ABSTRACT This article introduces a critical view on terrorism research and its knowledge about suicide terrorism. The analysis combines a feminist-postcolonial perspective with a sociology of knowledge approach, including discourse and dispositive analysis. It draws attention to the limitations of hegemonic knowledge production and to an Occi- dentalist self-assertion as its by-product. What we know about suicide terrorism and how we generate this knowledge, I argue by presenting a comprehensive study of analyses of scholarly publications on suicide bombing from the 1990s to 2006, is embedded in globally asymmetric power arrangements. I establish a link between the various forms of political violence that are present in scholarly expertise on suicide terrorism and the epistemic violence that is inherent in this field of knowledge production. By introducing the concept of epistemic violence, this text contributes to a more complex understanding of our fields of research, their objects of analysis, and the entanglements between these two dimensions, of which we are inevitably complic- itous as scholars. First, the transdisciplinary research perspective is introduced in order to move away the focus from political violence (suicide bombing) and turn it on epistemic violence (knowledge production about it). Second, I present the results of the research project that this article summarizes. Keywords: epistemic violence, suicide terrorism, Occidentalism, knowledge, coloni- ality WHAT DO WE KNOW? Suicide attacks challenge normative conceptions of power and order, legiti- macy and illegitimacy, rationality and deviance within the academic and political realm of International Relations and beyond. Producing and dis- seminating expertise on suicide attacks is one way of coming in terms with some of the challenges that these violent articulations of political agency affect in politics and science. Yet, what do the scholars and experts really know about it? How has this knowledge been aggregated and in what ways is it shaped? Which epistemologies, theories and methodologies lay the ground for the creation of this object of knowledge? And: What does this have to do with global power politics? Scholarly expertise is thought to provide solid explanations. Yet, the main- stream body of knowledge on suicide terrorism is not free from simplifica- 1. Researcher at the Centre for Peace Research and Peace Education, Alps-Adriatic University of Klagenfurt, Austria. Email: [email protected]. 3 ERJSSH 3(1), June 2016 tions, ideologizations, and biases. It adheres to the positivist model of a modernist paradigm and a problem-solving approach that is likely to be essentialist. This field of scholarly expertise is part of the globally asymmetric power relations in which both the attacks and the production of knowledge about them are situated. As I have shown in a comprehensive study (Brunner, 2011) of texts, paratexts (Genette, 1997), graphs, models, illustrations and book covers, a close assessment of the scholarly object of knowledge, i.e. suicide terrorism, can tell us a lot about the entanglements of political violence and scholarly knowledge production. Such an analysis exposes the ambivalences of the said knowledge production in a field of “embedded expertise” (Burnett & Whyte, 2005) which is situated between public discourse, politics and the academia. We are, thus, tasked to think of political violence and knowledge production as existing in a complex set- ting of “entangled histories” (Randeria, 2006) which did not begin in the fall of 1989 or in September 2001. These entanglements have to be thought of in the light of a longer and broader legacy of Western dominance, in a “colonial matrix of power” (Mignolo, 2009, p. 2). Firstly, here, a theoretical framework at the interface of Feminist IR (International Relations), Postcolonial Theory and Sociology of Knowledge is introduced. Then, the argument for enlarging discourse-oriented approach- es through Foucault’s less received notion of the dispositive, which enables a more materialist approach, is made.

Load more