Agonistic recognition as a remedy for identity backlash: insights from Israel and Turkey

Abstract

While an extensive part of the conflict transformation literature stresses the importance of transforming the identities of conflict parties through recognition, it fails to recognise the propensity of such transformations to generate ontological insecurity and dissonance, and consequently a possible backlash towards antagonistic identities. Drawing on agonistic thought, we develop a conception of agonistic recognition, premised on non-finalism, pluralist multilogue and disaggregated recognition. We suggest that these elements of agonistic recognition may guard against the development of ontological insecurity and dissonance in recognition processes. We comparatively analyse the connections and tensions between recognition, ontological insecurity/ dissonance and identity backlash experienced during the transformation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the context of the Oslo Peace Process in the 1990s and Turkey's 'rapprochement' with Greece in the context of its EU accession process in the 2000s. We also assess the presence of the elements of agonistic recognition in these two conflict transformation processes. Our contribution constitutes an important step towards the specification of agonistic peace in terms of its underlying recognition processes and in developing the empirical study of agonistic elements in actual conflict transformation processes.

International Mediation, Identity Construction, and Normative Change

“…Bar-Tal (2013: 323-24), for example, asserts that, to build peace, societies must gradually change "their fundamental views about the conflict, the goals, the rival, the relationship with the rival, their own group, their past"; in other words, they must change their identities (see also Berger 1996;Lederach 1997;Kelman 1997;Strömbom 2014;Khoury 2018). Furthermore, Rumelili & Strömbom (2021: 1361 observe that, "during the last few years, distinct literatures have developed in peace studies exploring how the concepts and processes of recognition, identity and ontological security intersect with peace processes." A crucial insight has been generated: specifically, that while identity change is a prerequisite for sustainable peace, transformations in self-understanding can, in turn, "trigger ontological insecurity" and thus undermine stability and harmony (Rumelili & Strömbom 2021: 1362.…”

“…Furthermore, Rumelili & Strömbom (2021: 1361 observe that, "during the last few years, distinct literatures have developed in peace studies exploring how the concepts and processes of recognition, identity and ontological security intersect with peace processes." A crucial insight has been generated: specifically, that while identity change is a prerequisite for sustainable peace, transformations in self-understanding can, in turn, "trigger ontological insecurity" and thus undermine stability and harmony (Rumelili & Strömbom 2021: 1362. As mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, conflict can solidify group identities, and ossify antagonistic relationships with others as communities' sense of self is defined in opposition to their enemies.…”

“…As mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, conflict can solidify group identities, and ossify antagonistic relationships with others as communities' sense of self is defined in opposition to their enemies. As these antagonistic narratives are challenged and softened through conflict resolution, a group's identity is shaken, potentially inducing "a state of anxiety, panic, [and] uncertainty" (Rumelili & Strömbom 2021: 1364. This can lead to a 'backlash' against peace (Rumelili & Strömbom 2021: 1364Rumelili 2015: 2-3).…”

Tracing responses to recognition in the Oslo peace process and its aftermath—The interlinkage between relational and internal ontological security

“…The latter pertains to internal dynamics, where disruptions of routinised narratives (Gustafsson, 2016) within the affected society give rise to ontological dissonance (Lupovici, 2012) and where incoherence between previously held discourses and new ones create anxiety regarding new policy directions drawn up by the new narratives. This then spurs avoidance measures in order to curb them (Rumelili & Strömbom, 2021). Hence, some individuals and groups increase their efforts at misrecognition of the other in attempts to avoid novel narratives which are in dissonance with or serve as a source of ontological insecurity (Lupovici, 2012).…”

Quest for Regional Hegemony: The Politics of Ontological Insecurity in the Saudi–Iran Rivalry

“…At affective level, fatwas complement ontological security narratives by reinforcing the collective mode of being and providing identification opportunities for the subjects. Religious narratives, especially if shaped within the conflictual or antagonistic context, may outline the perspectives of agents, and become to constitute a “formed framework for existence” in time (Rumelili & Strömbom, 2021: 4). In this sense, fatwas, especially during the moments of social and political crises, provide subjects with a narrative that they can identify with and that provides a level of certainty, continuity, and sense of order.…”