Elections – What For? | Figure for the Issue
© Chappatte dans Le Temps, Genève.
Elections – What For?
© Chappatte dans Le Temps, Genève.
The essays in this volume are the product of a new ‘research practicum‘ course in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the Graduate Institute in Geneva. They build on the debates on ‘Urban Morphology and violence’ to reflect on the associations between cities – their political orders and disorders – and outcomes ranging from occupation and resistance to marginalisation and containment. These texts foreshadow the possibility of centring – and challenging – the urban in our understanding of contemporary conflict, violence and peace. They are a first step in opening up a research agenda for a more textured analysis of spatial, geographical and temporal dynamics within the city in relation to violence, and, therefore, the mobilisation of spatial, temporal and visual modes of analysis. The promise is to make visible the varied roles of urban morphologies – adding to the debate on cities in and as sites of conflict.
As images of conflict and atrocities multiply, a disturbing question resurfaces: do international treaties designed to protect civilians, prevent genocide and regulate the use of war still carry any weight? From the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide to the founding principles of humanitarian law, the legal edifice built after the Second World War is faltering. Between institutional paralysis, political manipulation and blatant impunity, there is a seeming “return to the law of the strongest”. Concurrently, the notion of genocide has gained traction again as it is mobilised by a wide range of actors to denounce Israel’s attack on Gaza and its lethal consequences since 7 October 2023.
This Dossier questions the capacity — and the limits — of international law in the face of contemporary violence. What is the current level of trust in the international legal architecture to address occurrences of mass violence? What is the relevance of the notion of genocide today, as opposed to that of war crimes or crimes against humanity? What are the political stakes in the use of terms that have a judicial grounding and are invested with historical meaning and precedents? In a world where legal landmarks are more necessary but also more contested than ever, the dossier offers valuable insights into these questions.
We currently face a baffling paradox. While since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 a seemingly inexorable process of globalisation has been foreshadowing a peaceful and frontierless world, the number of walls across the world has been rising at a steady pace. Liberal and open societies buttressed by trade, international law and technological progress were supposed to implacably contribute to the erosion of frontiers and walls between nations. However, in a context of surging populist discourses, securitarian anxieties and identitarian politics as well as concomitant flows of migration alimented by climate change, conflict and poverty, nations have recently started to barricade themselves behind new walls.
