The “War on Terror” and the Military–Archaeology Complex: Iraq, Ethics, and Neo-Colonialism

The archaeological response to the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq is often portrayed as a crusade to rescue antiquities, destroyed either directly by the military action itself or indirectly by the looting of archaeological sites and museums. I argue in this paper that this narrative is awfully inadequate, and masks the ethical and political dimensions at the core of this historical episode. I contend that, in their often well-intended attempts to rescue antiquities, most archaeologists involved have projected a professionalized, apolitical and abstract response, devoid of the social and political context, and based on the fetishisation of a narrowly and problematically defined archaeological record. I argue further that the increasing collaboration of many archaeologists with the invading militaries and occupation authorities since 2003, assisted by the “cultural turn” especially within the US military, have laid the foundations for an emerging military-archaeology complex. I trace the contours of this phenomenon by examining various archaeological and museum discourses and practices. This new development (with historical resonances that go as far back as the 18th century, if not earlier) is linked directly with the ontology and epistemology of archaeology, and deserves further close scrutiny and analysis. The thesis advanced here does not advocate inaction and withdrawal in situations of warfare, but a critical engagement that safeguards the autonomy of the scholar; critiques the political agendas and power structures of contemporary warfare; deconstructs its discursive basis and its ideological overtones; and shows its catastrophic consequences for people and things alike, past and present.     

Are We Postcolonial Yet? Tales from the Battlefield

This paper questions whether archaeological thinking and practice have become post-colonial and ethically and politically aware and sophisticated, and comments on a number of instances (militarization of archaeology, sponsorship by ethically tainted global corporations, global publishing practices, the declaration of western metropolitan museums as ??universal??) where neo-colonial regimes of truth and practice are present, even amongst groups and organisations that advocate de-colonisation. It proposes that new theoretical insights are generated at the moments of inevitable and at times necessary confrontations with these neo-colonial regimes. Finally, it conjures up the figure of new global immigrant in order to not only highlight their plight and the need for archaeologists to fight racism and xenophobia, but also to point out that the exilic position, the on-going questioning of our deep-left attachments to nation-states, institutions and structures, provides the space for radical critique and for new ontological possibilities to emerge.     

Establishing the Middle Sea: The Late Bronze Age of Mediterranean Europe (1700–900 BC)

Journal of Archaeological Research - The Late Bronze Age (1700–900 BC) represents an extremely dynamic period for Mediterranean Europe. Here, we provide a comparative survey of the...     

Whose world and whose archaeology? The colonial present and the return of the political

El autor identifica un proyecto colonial crecientemente agresivo funcionando en Irak y Afganistán y considera que el fallo catastrófico de la comunidad arqueológica occidental de responder apropiadamente a las condiciones en ambas naciones. La manera de énfasis sobre arqueología está contribuyendo activamente no solamente a la legitimidad de una guerra ilegal y sin ética, sino también a la reproducción del régimen de poder y verdad que la guerra busca establecer. Se llama al WAC a “descentralizar” al mundo como es visto por los centros metropolitanos Occidentales, dejando a la “periferia” tomar la iniciativa, poner la agenda, y promover las medidas arqueológicas alternativas.

---

Résumé L'auteur identifie un projet colonialiste de plus en plus agressif en Irak et en Afghanistan, et considère léchec catastrophique de la communauté des archéologues occidentaux à répondre de fa?on approprée aux conditions dans chacune de ces deux nations. Insister sur l'archéologie contribue activement, non seulement à légitimer une guerre illégale et immorale, mais aussi à reproduire le régime de force et de vérité que la guerre cherche à établir. Il en appelle au WAC pour'dé-centrer'la vision du monde des centres métropolitains occidentaux, afin de permettre à la ‘périphérie’ de prendre l'initiative, de mettre en place un agenda, et de préconiser des épistémologies archéologiques alternatives.

     

State Collapse and its Implications for Peace–Building and Reconstruction

At the beginning of the twenty–first century, terms such as state collapse and failed states are becoming familiar, regularly used in international politics to describe a new and frightening challenge to international security. The dramatic events of September 11 have pushed the issue of collapsed states further into the limelight. This article has two aims. Firstly, it explains the contextual factors that gave rise to the phenomenon of state collapse. In the early post–Cold War period, state collapse was usually viewed as a regional phenomenon, and concerns were mainly limited to humanitarian consequences for the local population and destabilizing effects on neighbouring countries. Now, state collapse is seen in a more global context, and concerns are directed at the emergence of groups of non–state actors who are hostile to the fundamental values and interests of the international society such as peace, stability, rule of law, freedom and democracy. Secondly, the article offers some observations about the normative implications of the phenomenon of state collapse for peace–building and reconstruction.     

How should we analyze the connections between populism and nationalism: A response to Rogers Brubaker

In a recent article in this journal, Rogers Brubaker formulates a critique of the distinction we make in our work between populism and nationalism, and further develops his own, thicker conceptualization of populism, which integrates the nationalist dimension without however totally conflating populism and nationalism. In this article, we briefly respond to the critique of our work, further clarifying and refining our plea for clearly distinct conceptualizations of populism and nationalism in dialogue with the considerations formulated by Rogers Brubaker. More broadly, we see this response as a chance to contribute to the further development of a framework that allows for the rigorous study of populism's pivotal as well as complex and often troubling relation with nationalism.     

NEIGHBORHOOD EFFECTS: ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND LOOKING BEYOND THEM*

ABSTRACT The paper addresses the empirical significance of the social context in economic decisions. Decisions of individuals who share spatial and social milieus are likely to be interdependent, and econometric identification of social effects poses intricate data and methodological problems, including dealing with self‐selection in spatial and social groups. It uses a simple empirical framework to introduce social interactions effects at different levels of aggregation, and examines estimation problems in linear models, the impact of self‐selection and of nonlinearities. It also examines neighborhood effects in job matching and proposes a research agenda that offers new techniques and data sources.