'BEVERAGES' VERSUS 'FLAGS': A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE DISPUTES OVER HANS ISLAND AND THE IMIA/KARDAK ISLETS THROUGH CONFLICT THEORY

Abstract

Referring to the constructive and destructive pillars of the conflict theory, the article aims to demonstrate that, despite the apparent similarities between the two land claim disputes, they are fundamentally different. In this regard, after analyzing the elements that define both conflicts, the paper presents the Hans Island dispute as a constructive antagonism and the Imia / Kardak Islets crisis as a destructive one. Although the replacement of symbolic drinks and flags characterizes both conflicts, the first case indicates the importance of geo-economic aspects, while the second clearly illustrates geopolitical competition. The authors see the Hans Island dispute as a means of maintaining the status quo and the Imia / Kardak Islands as a way of changing the state of affairs. By doing so, the paper tries to present how the circumstances in which the two conflicts evolved proved to be favourable or constructive in one case and unfavourable, respectively destructive in the other.