Routinisation of the victimhood as a mechanism of ontological security seeking: the case of Serbia

The ontological security of a macro-political community is understood as the community’s secure sense of being-in-the-world, expressed in a predictable social environment and in the stability of the representation of the Self in the past, present, and future. The mechanism of routinization is usually postulated by theorists as the repetition of certain social actions designed to bracket out the sense of collective anxiety and thereby become ontologically secure. The present article represents one of the first attempts to conceptualize the notions of “routinization” and “routine” in the theory of ontological security in international relations. The author demonstrates that routine is a kind of convention “established” through routinization. To unveil the practice of routinization, the author has chosen the victimhood as a routine for the Serbian macro-political community. The relevance of the category is substantiated by the existence and results of studies focusing on the victimhood in Serbian politics. The routinization of victimhood was examined on two cases: narratives on the World War II and the Yugoslav wars in contemporary Serbia. Victim representations of WWII are explicitly routinized through increased attention to civilian casualties (“Jasenovac Martyrs” or victims of Nazi terror). Victimhood in the Yugoslav wars is manifested both through the commemorations of traumatic episodes of national biography (Operation “Storm”, NATO bombings) and through the contestation of the fact of involvement in mass crimes (“genocide in Srebrenica”) that can “blur” the routinization of victimhood. Victimhood in WWII narrative is a consensus representation against the background of the existence of competing historical narratives. In relation to the Yugoslav Wars, the routinization of victimhood constitutes the main way in which the mechanism of “competition for victim status” is implemented. Hence, the routinization of victimhood contributes to ontological security seeking.

1. Berenskoetter F. Parameters of a national biography. European journal of international relations. 2014, Vol. 20, N 1, P. 262–288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1354066112445290

2. Bilewicz M., Stefaniak A. Can a victim be responsible? Antisemitic consequences of victimhood-based identity and competitive victimhood in Poland. In: Bokus B. (ed.) Responsibility: An interdisciplinary perspective. Piaseczno: Studio Lexem, 2013, P. 69–77.

3. Browning C.S. Brexit, existential anxiety and ontological (in) security. In: Catarina Kinnvall C., Manners I., Mitzen J. (eds). Ontological insecurity in the European Union. Routledge, 2020, P. 88–107.

4. Byford J. When I say “The Holocaust,” I mean “Jasenovac” remembrance of the Holocaust in contemporary Serbia. East European Jewish Affairs. 2007, Vol. 37, N 1, P. 51–74.

5. Damjanovic R. Serbian victimhood and historical injustice: Understanding heritage sites and narratives in the former Yugoslavia. In: Lixinski L., Zhu Y. (eds). Heritage, conflict, and peace-building. London: Routledge, 2024, P. 62–80.

6. Đureinović J. Politika sećanja na ratove devedesetih u Srbiji: istorijski revizionizam i izazovi memorijalizacije. Beograd: Fond za humanitarno parvo, 2021, 44 p. (In Serb.)

7. Efremenko D.V. Memory as Casus Belli. Russia in global affairs. 2022, Vol. 20, N 6 (118), P. 119–141. (In Russ.)

8. Efremenko D.V. Skeletons in a Slavic Closet. Controversies of historical memory and nation-building in Serbia and Croatia after the collapse of the SFRY. Polis. Political studies. 2021, N 5, P. 127–145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/ jpps/2021.05.09 (In Russ.)

9. Ejdus F. Crisis and ontological insecurity. Serbia’s anxiety over Kosovo's secession. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020, 202 p.

10. Giddens A. Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford: Stanford university press, 1991, 256 p.

11. Jacoby T.A. A theory of victimhood: Politics, conflict and the construction of victimbased identity. Millennium. 2015, Vol. 43, N 2, P. 511–530.

12. Kinnvall C. Globalization and religious nationalism: Self, identity, and the search for ontological security. Political psychology. 2004, Vol. 25, N 5, P. 741–767.

13. Kinnvall C., Mitzen J. Anxiety, fear, and ontological security in world politics: Thinking with and beyond Giddens. International theory. 2020, Vol. 12, N 2, P. 240–256.

14. Koprivica Č.D. Како промишљати српску кризу? Социолошки преглед. 2008, Vol. 42, N 2, P. 129–146. (In Serb.)

15. Lerner A.B. The uses and abuses of victimhood nationalism in international politics. European journal of international relations. 2020, Vol. 26, N 1, P. 62–87.

16. Mälksoo M. «Memory must be defended»: Beyond the politics of mnemonical security. Security dialogue. 2015, Vol. 46, N 3, P. 221–237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010614552549

17. Mehler D. The last ‘never again’? Srebrenica and the making of a memory imperative. European review of history: Revue européenne d'histoire. 2017, Vol. 24, N 4, P. 606–630.

18. Meleshkina E. Yu., Pomiguev I.A. The ideas of nationalism and yugoslavism in Serbian political discourse. Rusin. 2019, Vol. 58, P. 306–321. (In Russ.)

19. Mencej M. The dead, the war, and ethnic identity: ghost narratives in post-war Srebrenica. Folklore. 2021, Vol. 132, N 4, P. 412–433.

20. Mitzen J. Ontological security in world politics: State identity and the security dilemma. European journal of international relations. 2006, Vol. 12, N 3, P. 341–370.

21. Odak S., Benčić A. Jasenovac – A past that does not pass: The presence of Jasenovac in Croatian and Serbian collective memory of conflict. East European politics and societies. 2016, Vol. 30, N 4, P. 805–829.

22. Pavlović Z. Идеологија и политика: значај разлика у нивоу образовања за политичке поделе у Србији и Црној Гори. Српска политичка мисао. 2015, Special Issue, P. 125–152. (In Serb.)

23. Ponamareva A.M. An inconvenient past of World War II in the historical policy of the Republic of Croatia. Lomonosov world politics journal. 2020, Vol. 11, N 4, P. 39–67. (In Russ.)

24. Ramet S. Dead kings and national myths: Why myths of founding and martyrdom are important. In: Listhaug O., Ramet S., Dulić D. (eds). Civic and uncivic values: Serbia in the Post-Milošević Era. Budapest: Central European university press, 2011, P. 267–298.

25. Rastegaev D.O. «Anti-memory space»: Srebrenica narrative in the structure of ontological security of the Republika Srpska. Political science (RU). 2023, N 2, P. 315–337. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2023.02.14 (In Russ.)

26. Šijaković B. Велики рат, Видовданска етика, памћење-о историји идеја и Спомену Жртве. Politeia – Naučni časopis Fakulteta političkih nauka u Banjoj Luci za društvena pitanja. 2015, Vol. 5, N 9, P. 9–57. (In Serb.)

27. Steele B. Ontological security in international relations: Self-identity and the IR state. New York: Routledge, 2008, 244 p.

28. Stojanović D. Value changes in the interpretations of history in Serbia. In: Listhaug O., Ramet S., Dulić D. (eds). Civic and uncivic values: Serbia in the Post-Milošević Era. Budapest: Central European university press, 2011, P. 221‒240.

29. Subotić J. Genocide narratives as narratives-in-dialogue. Journal of regional security. 2015, Vol. 10, N 2, P. 177–198.

30. Timofeev A.Yu. Metamorphoses of memory of the Russian-Serbian Brotherhood of War in Modern Serbia. MGIMO Review of international relations. 2020, N 13 (4), P. 142–156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2020-4-73-142-156 (In Russ.)

31. Wohl M.J.A., Branscombe N.R., Klar Y. Collective guilt: Emotional reactions when one's group has done wrong or been wronged. European review of social psychology. 2006, Vol. 17, N 1, P. 1–37.

32. Zarakol A. Ontological (In)security and state denial of historical crimes: Turkey and Japan. International relations. 2010, Vol. 24, N 1, P. 3‒23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117809359040