Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T14:54:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Cristina Maranhao.pdf: 11708246 bytes, checksum: a0bee347f82f275fe29d92e5d9847d6b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-10-02 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This thesis seeks to comprehend the imagetic construction of contemporary wars transmitted by national and international media, through the case study of two current conflicts: the war between police and drug dealers at Rio de Janeiro´s favelas of Complexo do Alemão, and the armed conflict between israelis and palestinians in the Gaza Strip, involving the Palestine Question. Devided in two parts, war and image, this work shows how significative changes occurred in the form of the warfare, associated to new global economic formula, originated from globalization and mundialization. These changes reflected in the form of representing the armed conflicts and therefore in the current photojournalism. . From the observation of significative diferences in the field of images, we focus in two aspects: the image as an action of imagination, and the image as excessive production of clichés from the society of the spectacle . This thesis proposes the construction of a western imagery catalog, elaborated from the relationship between the analysed images of conflicts and the images collected from paints, engraving or photographs. This proposition occured because we realised that there is an imagetic construction of war, wich is responsable for the imaginary of the warrior and of conflicts. Images of war today have changed along with changes of the armed conflict universe, demonstrating a reverberation of images and specific subjects turned into simple pictural clichés, wich in many cases do not represent the violence experienced by the population envolved. This reverberation expresses the generalization of images of war today / Esta tese procura compreender a construção imagética das guerras contemporâneas veiculadas pela mídia nacional e internacional por meio do estudo de caso de dois conflitos atuais: a guerra travada entre policiais e traficantes nas favelas cariocas do Complexo do Alemão e o conflito armado entre israelenses e palestinos na Faixa de Gaza que envolve a Questão Palestina. Dividido em duas partes, guerra e imagem, o trabalho mostra como ocorreram mudanças significativas na forma de guerrear associadas a nova formulação econômica global proveniente da globalização e da mundialização. Estas mudanças refletiram-se na forma de representar os conflitos armados e consequentemente no fotojornalismo atual. A partir da constatação de diferenças significativas no campo da imagem, nos concentramos dois aspectos: a imagem como uma ação do imaginar e a imagem como produção excessiva e formadora de clichês provenientes da sociedade do espetáculo . A tese propõe a construção de um catálogo imagético ocidental elaborado a partir da relação entre as imagens analisadas dos conflitos e imagens coletadas seja na pintura, em gravuras ou na fotografia. A proposta deste ocorreu, pois percebemos que existe uma construção imagética da guerra esta que é responsável pela elaboração do imaginário do guerreiro e dos conflitos. As imagens de guerra na atualidade se modificaram juntamente com as alterações do universo dos conflitos armados, demonstrando uma reverberação de imagens e de temas específicos transformando em meros clichês imagéticos que em muitos casos não representa a violência vivenciada pela população que está envolvida. Reverberação, esta, que expressa a generalização das imagens de guerra na atualidade

<p>Mitt syfte med detta arbete är att undersöka judarnas invandring till Palestina och konflikten som har uppstått mellan Israel och Palestina. Det är en konflikt som har visat sig vara extremt svårlöst och komplex. Israel-Palestinakonflikten innebär att det är två folk och ett land. Båda vill ha marken och gör anspråk på den. Judarna hänvisar till Bibeln och tycker att de har rätt till landet för att Gud utlovat landet till dem, medan palestinierna hänvisar till att de har bott i detta land långt före judarna. Idag har judarna ett eget land, Israel. Israel skapades av de judar som invandrade till Palestina.</p><p>Jag försökte ge svar på tre frågor och jag tycker att det är viktigt att ge läsaren en uppfattning om de viktiga bakgrundsfaktorer som orsakade den svårlösta konflikten mellan Israel och Palestina. I första frågan försökte jag ge svar på om den sionistiska rörelsens uppkomst på 1800-talet och de första idéerna att skapa ett judiskt nationellt hem. Sedan beskrev jag sionisternas desperata kamp för att få de dåvarande stormakternas stöd för att bilda det nationella hemmet i Palestina. Resultatet av sionisternas kamp om att övertyga stormakterna lyckades 1917 när britterna skriver under Balfourdeklarationen. Denna innehåller den brittiska regeringens stöd till judarna att etablera ett hem i Palestina och samtidigt ger britterna löfte till araberna om ett självständigt styre i Palestina (britterna höll aldrig sitt löfte till araberna och självständigheten blir en dröm för palestinier).</p><p>I andra frågan beskrev jag de viktiga aktörernas roll i Israel-Palestinakonflikten och deras stöd till judarna när FN presenterade sin delningsplan och efter att staten Israel grundades 1948. FN:s delningsplan var en av de viktigaste orsakerna till konflikten mellan Israel och Palestina, eftersom judarna fick behålla mer än hälften av Palestina efter delningen. Araberna avvisade delningsplanen och tyckte att delningsplanen var orättvis. Trots FN:s orättvisa delningsplan och arabernas reaktion mot delningsplanen, utropade judarna staten Israels självständighet år 1948. Strax efter att Israel utropat sin självständighet, förklarade flera arabstater krig mot Israel medan USA, Sovjetunionen, Frankrike och Storbritannien erkände staten Israel.</p><p>I den tredje frågan försökte jag beskriva några av de viktiga krig som uppstått mellan Israel och arabstaterna. Dessa krig orsakade också att denna konflikt blev ännu värre och mer svårlöst. Efter att Israel utropat sin självständighet, tills idag, har en rad olika krig ägt rum mellan arabstater och Israel. Sexdagarskriget, oktoberkriget, första och andra intifadan är bara några av dessa krig. Anledningen till alla dessa krig för araberna var att återfå sina förlorade områden från Israel. Under denna konflikt uppstod det många arabiska och judiska nationalistiska grupper.</p><p>Idag ockuperar judarna den största delen av Palestina. Förutom Egypten och Jordanien erkänner inga arabländer staten Israel. Palestina kämpar fortfarande för att återfå sina ockuperade områden från Israel. Israel-Palestinakonflikten fortsätter och hittills har man inte hittat någon lösning på den välkända konflikten.</p>

Mitt syfte med detta arbete är att undersöka judarnas invandring till Palestina och konflikten som har uppstått mellan Israel och Palestina. Det är en konflikt som har visat sig vara extremt svårlöst och komplex. Israel-Palestinakonflikten innebär att det är två folk och ett land. Båda vill ha marken och gör anspråk på den. Judarna hänvisar till Bibeln och tycker att de har rätt till landet för att Gud utlovat landet till dem, medan palestinierna hänvisar till att de har bott i detta land långt före judarna. Idag har judarna ett eget land, Israel. Israel skapades av de judar som invandrade till Palestina. Jag försökte ge svar på tre frågor och jag tycker att det är viktigt att ge läsaren en uppfattning om de viktiga bakgrundsfaktorer som orsakade den svårlösta konflikten mellan Israel och Palestina. I första frågan försökte jag ge svar på om den sionistiska rörelsens uppkomst på 1800-talet och de första idéerna att skapa ett judiskt nationellt hem. Sedan beskrev jag sionisternas desperata kamp för att få de dåvarande stormakternas stöd för att bilda det nationella hemmet i Palestina. Resultatet av sionisternas kamp om att övertyga stormakterna lyckades 1917 när britterna skriver under Balfourdeklarationen. Denna innehåller den brittiska regeringens stöd till judarna att etablera ett hem i Palestina och samtidigt ger britterna löfte till araberna om ett självständigt styre i Palestina (britterna höll aldrig sitt löfte till araberna och självständigheten blir en dröm för palestinier). I andra frågan beskrev jag de viktiga aktörernas roll i Israel-Palestinakonflikten och deras stöd till judarna när FN presenterade sin delningsplan och efter att staten Israel grundades 1948. FN:s delningsplan var en av de viktigaste orsakerna till konflikten mellan Israel och Palestina, eftersom judarna fick behålla mer än hälften av Palestina efter delningen. Araberna avvisade delningsplanen och tyckte att delningsplanen var orättvis. Trots FN:s orättvisa delningsplan och arabernas reaktion mot delningsplanen, utropade judarna staten Israels självständighet år 1948. Strax efter att Israel utropat sin självständighet, förklarade flera arabstater krig mot Israel medan USA, Sovjetunionen, Frankrike och Storbritannien erkände staten Israel. I den tredje frågan försökte jag beskriva några av de viktiga krig som uppstått mellan Israel och arabstaterna. Dessa krig orsakade också att denna konflikt blev ännu värre och mer svårlöst. Efter att Israel utropat sin självständighet, tills idag, har en rad olika krig ägt rum mellan arabstater och Israel. Sexdagarskriget, oktoberkriget, första och andra intifadan är bara några av dessa krig. Anledningen till alla dessa krig för araberna var att återfå sina förlorade områden från Israel. Under denna konflikt uppstod det många arabiska och judiska nationalistiska grupper. Idag ockuperar judarna den största delen av Palestina. Förutom Egypten och Jordanien erkänner inga arabländer staten Israel. Palestina kämpar fortfarande för att återfå sina ockuperade områden från Israel. Israel-Palestinakonflikten fortsätter och hittills har man inte hittat någon lösning på den välkända konflikten.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität, Göttingen, 2004/2005. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [301]-313) and indexes.

Submitted by Noeme Timbo (noeme.timbo@metodista.br) on 2016-08-09T19:21:18Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Tamires Silva Pereira Prazeres.pdf: 910375 bytes, checksum: 982d55415ff4191b071ad2ff48020523 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-08-09T19:21:18Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Tamires Silva Pereira Prazeres.pdf: 910375 bytes, checksum: 982d55415ff4191b071ad2ff48020523 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-03-17 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES / This search examines the religion in the conflict between Israel and Palestine, especially in the context of implementation of the State of Israel in 1948. The analysis takes as historical definition of conflict the period 1896-1948, when the inmigration of the first groups of Jews to the Palestinian territories. The initial question is how Jews and Muslims were related in the early years of inmigration to the creation of the State of Israel. The main issue to be clarified is how Western cultural building toward the Palestinians interfered in the conflict, especially with regard to the taking of the land and the construction of a new country within an existing, socially, religiously and culturally. Finally, the search asks about the effect of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians in the Protestant religious space, especially among conservative groups and fundamentalists of this branch of christianity. The research is fully literature and refers to postcolonial theories to discuss the history of the territory, with regard to the religious aspects of the conflict / O presente trabalho analisa o papel da religião no conflito entre Israel e Palestina, principalmente no contexto da implantação do Estado de Israel, em 1948. A análise toma como delimitação histórica do conflito o período de 1896 a 1948, quando ocorre a migração das primeiras levas de judeus para os territórios palestinos. A pergunta inicial é sobre como judeus e muçulmanos se relacionavam nos primeiros anos de imigração até a criação do Estado de Israel. O problema principal a ser esclarecido é como a construção cultural ocidental em relação aos palestinos interferiu no conflito, principalmente no que tange à tomada da terra e à construção de um novo país dentro de um já existente, socialmente, religiosamente e culturalmente. Finalmente a pesquisa pergunta pela repercussão do conflito entre israelenses e palestinos no campo religioso protestante, principalmente entre grupos conservadores e fundamentalistas deste ramo do cristianismo. A pesquisa é totalmente bibliográfica e toma como referência as teorias pós-coloniais para debater a história do território, no que se refere aos aspectos religiosos do conflito.

A presente dissertação de mestrado tem por objetivo traçar uma história da ideia de um Estado binacional para árabes e judeus na Palestina histórica. O estudo busca, após definir as especificidades de um Estado binacional, compreender a circulação da ideia binacional no período anterior à criação do Estado de Israel, em 1948, entre judeus e árabes-palestinos progressistas, dentro do movimento sionista e em organizações de esquerda da Palestina. Em um segundo momento, busca-se entender como o período compreendido entre a criação do Estado de Israel e o processo que levou aos Acordos de Oslo, nos anos 90, ao mesmo tempo silenciou o ideal binacional e criou as bases para seu ressurgimento na virada do século. Por fim, são analisadas, frente ao contexto israelo-palestino na atualidade, as perspectivas do ressurgimento de propostas binacionais, mais nítido entre jornalistas de esquerda, algumas figuras que fizeram ou fazem marginalmente parte da política institucional, intelectuais e acadêmicos adeptos de perspectivas críticas, assim como entre ativistas e movimentos sociais por direitos humanos envolvidos na região. / This Masters thesis aims to trace a history of the idea of a bi-national state for Arabs and Jews in historical Palestine. After laying out the specificities of a binational state, it reconstructs the circulation of the binational idea in the period before the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, among progressive Jews and Palestinian Arabs, in the Zionist movement, and among left-wing organizations in Palestine. In a second step, we we analize how the period between the establishment of the State of Israel and the peace process that led to the Oslo Accords, in the 90s, was marked by silence around the binational ideal while all the same laying the foundations for its revival at the turn of the 21st century. Finally, regarding todays Israeli-Palestinian context, we analyze the prospects of revival of binational proposals, focusing on left-wing journalists, a number of more or less marginal participants in institutional politics, some critical intellectuals and academic supporters, and among activists and social movements for human rights.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-09-21T19:27:28Z No. of bitstreams: 1 silvioaugustodecarvalho.pdf: 1457909 bytes, checksum: b5aef33d4322db69c37620d835b5ba91 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Diamantino Mayra (mayra.diamantino@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-09-26T20:28:00Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 silvioaugustodecarvalho.pdf: 1457909 bytes, checksum: b5aef33d4322db69c37620d835b5ba91 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-09-26T20:28:00Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 silvioaugustodecarvalho.pdf: 1457909 bytes, checksum: b5aef33d4322db69c37620d835b5ba91 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-04-30 / O objetivo desta dissertação é o de analisar o modo como os meios de comunicação de massa, especificamente o New York Times (NYT) e o Wall Street Journal (WSJ), construíram suas representações sobre a invasão israelense da Faixa de Gaza entre dezembro de 2008 e janeiro de 2009. Pretendemos mostrar como os jornais, na sua versão on-line, não são apenas espaços sociais de conflito, mas armas de legitimação de guerras e invasões, na medida em que tendem a construir visões de mundo legitimadoras da ordem vigente. Neste sentido, tais visões são perpassadas pela redução da figura do oponente cujo valor é, por isso, nivelado a seu âmbito biológico. O outro passa a ser visto em termos biopolíticos, isto é, raciais, o que possibilita manobras e controles sobre sua imagem e, portanto, sobre as estratégias bélicas. Ao contribuir para consolidar e naturalizar a visão de mundo dos dominantes, os meios de comunicação de massa atuam sobre a dissolução da Memória Política, determinando os limites do pensamento dentro dos quais o último conflito se deu. A questão da independência da Palestina estaria – dentro de nossa hipótese -, portanto, atrelada à agenda sionista, movimento que se consolidou na busca de uma sociedade judaica racialmente pura. Para isto, usamos conceitos de Michel Foucault, Pierre Bourdieu e Immanuel Wallerstein, na medida em que a microfísica do poder não pode ser vista fora do sistema capitalista moderno, calcado em uma hierarquia de países no plano internacional. / This paper’s goal is to analyze the way through which american mass media, especially The New York Times (NYT) and The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), created their representations about the last Israeli invasion in Gaza Strip, between December (2008) and january (2009). We intend to show how the newspapers (on line version) not only are social spaces of conflict, but also tools used to give legitimacy to the status quo. Taking that into account, those visions try to reduce the figure of the opponent whose meaning is, because of this process, reduced to his or her biological dimension. The other is seeing through a biopolitical view, we mean, in racial terms, which helps to control his or her image and, in turn, take control over war’s strategic that focus on them. Bearing in mind that the newspapers contribute to consolidate and naturalize the powerful’s world vision, they work to dissolve the Political Memory, determining the epistemological limits of the discussion about the last conflict. The question of Palestine would remain, therefore, - according to our hipotesis controlled to the zionist’s agenda, movement that consolidated itself defending a pure jewish society. We, basically, used Michel Foucault, Pierre Bourdieu and Immanuel Wallerstein’s concepts as the traditional concept of power can not be seen out of the modern capitalist system, based in a hierarchy of countries in the international arena.

Magíster en Estudios Internacionales / No autorizada por el autor para ser publicada a texto completo / El 7 de diciembre de 2010, Argentina, a través del decreto 1882 y una declaración unilateral de la Presidente Cristina Fernández, ha reconocido a Palestina como Estado libre independiente y soberano, con sus fronteras al 4 de julio de 1967, siguiendo la línea establecida por Brasil, en primer lugar, y Uruguay más tarde. Por su parte, Chile ha efectuado dicho reconocimiento el día 7 de enero de 2011, a partir de una declaración realizada por el Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores, Alfredo Moreno, en la cual se establece especial énfasis en la necesidad imperiosa de impulsar el proceso de negociaciones entre Palestina e Israel, con miras a alcanzar un acuerdo de paz pleno, definitivo y satisfactorio, conforme con las Resoluciones adoptadas por la Organización de las Naciones Unidas. En dicha declaración no se hace ninguna alusión explícita a la delimitación fronteriza. (Declaración del Gobierno de Chile sobre el reconocimiento del Estado de Palestina, 7/1/2011) De allí que, la particular diferencia respecto al reconocimiento explícito de Palestina como Estado por parte de Chile y Argentina permite reflexionar sobre los factores que condujeron a tomar las respectivas decisiones en materia de política exterior por parte de cada uno de estos Estados. En este sentido, sería relevante indagar respecto a la presencia de factores internos, esto es, las tendencias políticas establecidas tanto en Chile y Argentina hacia este histórico conflicto en Medio Oriente, y la incidencia que poseen las comunidades judía y árabe en ambos países en lo que respecta al diseño de su política exterior; así como de factores externos, relativos al marco regional e internacional -en especial la postura de Brasil y Estados Unidos.

This study is an attempt to comprehend how Palestinians and Israelis perceive the conflict and the peace process. It identifies the channels and dynamics related to the shaping of their perceptions on the individual, community, and political levels. The main objectives of this study are to probe the degree of homogeneity between these levels for both Palestinians and Israelis as well as the degree of discord between them on the same levels and to pinpoint intervening factors that contribute to carving out the ultimate perceptions that individuals hold. Unlike previous work, this study employs a multi-method approach to measure and benchmark of the topic at hand. To bridge further gaps, a developed matrix extends the analyses on temporalspatial dimensions of individuals’ cognitions, affections, and behaviors pertaining to the conflict. This study falls within the descriptive research that seeks probing the effect of macro-level factors (the media, and political parties/leaders) on microlevel ones (the audience cognitive processing), and is involved in describing and identifying its elements and components through the collection and analysis of data. Interpretation of data is based on a combination of content analysis for eight major newspapers, two public opinion surveys and a document analysis affiliated to the main four political parties. The analysis of the Palestinians and Israelis’ perspective of the conflict and the peace process revealed that the actual conflict has three main dimensions: First, the struggle between individuals, which is full of self-contradictions, as each party describes a conflict in a way different than the other. It is a conflict, in which the past and present of the two sides of the conflict are different - the bitter past itself with different narratives, yet the motives are the same but conducive to different results. Whereas each party is blaming the other on these three levels, the conflict is rooted in different forms, but intertwined with one another. Both nations differ entirely in prioritizing the core issues of the conflict. For example, the study reveals that for Palestinians the issue of Jerusalem ranks first, followed by the issue of releasing of prisoners. The issue of the refugees ranks third, and paradoxically recognizing Israel as a Jewish state ranks last according to Palestinians. As for the Israelis, the issue of security and safety ranks first, the recognition of the Jewishness of their state ranks second, followed by the issue of Jerusalem that comes in the third place, whereas and at loggerheads with the Palestinians’ aspirations, the establishing of a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders ranks last on their part. The same applies to the proposed solutions of the conflict. The future is fuzzy, and everyone sees the most appropriate solutions that fit their own interest, as a part of the zero-sum game. Both peoples yearn for peace, and both peoples are tired and bored of the conflict, but the majority in both sides, however, are not willing to make concessions towards this end and consequently are not optimistic in reaching peace in the near future. Furthermore, each party does not view the political leadership of the other party as a partner for peace. Secondly, a media conflict, where the analysis illustrates a similarity in the issues raised in the Palestinian and Israeli newspapers, but there were distinct statistical differences in the extent of coverage and in the display of those issues and their interpretation between the Israeli and Palestinian media, the matter which is clearly reflects on the individuals’ view on the causes of the conflict, its consequences and solutions. Regarding the third level of the conflict i.e. the conflict between political leaders and parties, a strong statistical relationship has been established between political affiliation to a particular party and the perspective of both, the Palestinian and Israeli peoples, on the most significant issues of the conflict. This is reflected in the homogeneity degree of the priorities of the parties and political leaders in the analysis of documents and media, in the analysis of the content with the order of priorities in the Palestinian and Israeli mindset. The statistical results have particularly shown a strong reciprocal correlation between the angles of this triangle. The relationship boosts wrong inherited notions and beliefs, which necessitates their eradication and adoption of new strategies on the part of political stakeholders. In that case, the media will publish them in a positive way that serves the peace process and bring the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to an end. Finally, on the basis of the results and conclusions of this dissertation a model was developed that illustrated how these interactions frame realities into new realities that let the peace process sink even more day by day.

This thesis is focused on the israeli-palestinian conflict, which is an often discussed topic, but especially in the Czech literature the perspective of common people is missing. The main focus will be on family memory and how it transfers within the generations. This will be demonstrated on an analysis of interviews with members of four families (of three generations: grandparent, parent, child) living in the West bank. That is why the method of oral history will be used. The main timeline will be year 1967 which is remembered by the oldest member of the interviewed families. In 1967 the third arab-israeli war took place when Israel defeated Egypt, Syria and Jordan and started occupying the Golan Heights, Sinai peninsula and a large part of the Palestinian territory including the eastern part of Jerusalem. This war caused another exodus of Palestinians and the beginning of building illegal settlements in the West Bank. This event is usually described from the political point of view but little is known about what happened to common people. The point of this thesis is to view this issue from different than official sources and give the topic a new dimension.