CfP: ECPR, SG Citizenship, two panels for Montreal 2015. Deadline 16.2
POLITICS OF DUAL CITIZENSHIP
Recent events in Caucasus, Crimea and Ukraine have shed new light on different understandings of citizenship and dual citizenship. The situation between Russia and Ukraine is no doubt an extreme one but there are many other modes of diaspora politics. Practicalities, as rights and duties, vary, as recently some states have even established electoral constituencies and parliamentary representation for their external citizens. Essentially granting dual citizenship is a domestic practice, which opens space for politics and politization concerning the roles of citizens. On one hand the possibility of multiple citizenships has been seen, perhaps in a somewhat touting way, as a long overdue passing of the old Westphalian state system, but as examples in Europe and elsewhere show, other perspectives are also possible. Some of them are clearly questions of power politics, both domestically and internationally. Then again, there is also a relevant international dimension, and there are numerous actors involved in these diaspora matters, like the kin-state, host-state and the citizens/minorities beyond borders themselves. Nevertheless, the discipline of IR has paid surprisingly little attention to these questions, although citizenship deals very deeply with state borders, territories, and thus intensifies questions of identity, belonging and even loyalty.
The panel seeks to collect all those interested in citizenship, dual citizenship, as kin-state activity, diaspora and transnationalism. We welcome studies comparing practices in Europe and beyond, as more theoretical and conceptual approaches.
Dr Claude Proeschel, Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques
Religious convictions and citizenship today
This panel is dedicated to the implications in terms of citizenship of some religious revendications. Based on religious freedom, and, more generally, on individual liberties, these revendications, at least in some manifestations, express a willingness of questioning the common standards or norms or of exempting part of the population of exposure to these standards such as in the case of requests for conscientious objection. These requests are based on the assertion of incompatibility between the conception of the good linked to the individual convictions and the democratic standards.
Can this be a general rule of functioning of a democratic State ? What is the balance between individual rights and the will to not exclude individuals or groups from society and from the common principles ruling it ? This lies, more generally, the debate of the ability of our postmodern societies to establish common values and to legitimate them.This panel will include 3-4 papers. National and comparative studies are welcomed such as more theoretical papers.