Matching Items (2)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

Political legitimacy of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood and the Syrian Islamic Front

Description
This research focused on the extent to which Syria's Muslim Brotherhood and Syrian Islamic Front have managed to acquire political legitimacy within a society that has historically remained under the control of either a foreign occupier or an oppressive regime. In addition, the added instability caused by the various ethnic/religious…

This research focused on the extent to which Syria's Muslim Brotherhood and Syrian Islamic Front have managed to acquire political legitimacy within a society that has historically remained under the control of either a foreign occupier or an oppressive regime. In addition, the added instability caused by the various ethnic/religious allegiances, external forces and a long-standing tradition of inhibiting a civil society have caused their legitimacy within the society to fluctuate dramatically. As a result the Islamic opposition parties in Syria have undergone a variety of ideological and organizational changes in an attempt to acquire a firm support base from Syria's varied population. Therefore, this thesis looked at each Islamic party's ability to obtain support from a wide spectrum of the Syrian populace, starting from their introduction into the political theatre, up until the onset of the Syrian Civil War.
ContributorsDeLintt, Jesus Gabriel (Author) / Lattouf, Mirna (Thesis director) / Ali, Souad (Committee member) / Gallab, Abdullahi (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor)
Created2014-05
132325-Thumbnail Image.png

Asylum in the United States and the European Union: Legal and Systemic Challenges from a Decade of Deterrence Policy

Description
Over the past decade, the United States and the European Union have adopted major changes to asylum policy and enforcement, specifically the increase of deterrence policies contrary to international asylum norms. The goal of this has been to reduce the pull factors towards the US and EU. Deterrence policies have…

Over the past decade, the United States and the European Union have adopted major changes to asylum policy and enforcement, specifically the increase of deterrence policies contrary to international asylum norms. The goal of this has been to reduce the pull factors towards the US and EU. Deterrence policies have largely been characterized by two main strategies: (1) deterrence at the border through stricter regulations and detention policies, and (2) deterrence through the creation of formal buffer zone countries between the asylum seekers’ countries of origin and the ultimate country of destination. These policies have been instituted in response to the spike in Central American asylum seekers at the US/Mexico border and Syrian asylum seekers at the Greece/Turkey border at the entrance of the EU. This paper compares these two separate geographic areas––the US and EU––due to their roles in the development of international law, their roles in the development and management of these crises, and the similar increase of asylum seekers in 2014-15. This paper also details the severity of the conditions in the asylee-sending areas––Central America and Syria––which are major “push factors” driving the crises. Finally, this paper explores the novel use of Mexico and Turkey as formal buffer zones by the United Staes and the European Union, respectively. The increase of deterrence policies culminating in the creation of formal buffer zones countries violates key principles of international asylum law, namely non-refoulement. These buffer zones must be redesigned proactively to better suit the realities of asylum in the 21st century.
ContributorsDooling, Maria Hana (Author) / Sivak, Henry (Thesis director) / Calleros, Charles (Committee member) / School of Molecular Sciences (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05