Dangerous brown men:exploiting sex, violence and feminism in the 'war on terror'

Why is the public presentation of the war on terror suffused with sexualised racism? What does this tell us about ideas of gender, sexuality, religious and political identity and the role of the state in the Western powers? Can we diffuse inter-ethnic conflicts and change the way the West pursues its security agenda by understanding the role of sexualised racism in the war on terror? In asking such questions, Gargi Bhattacharyya considers how the concepts of imperialism, feminism, terror and security can be applied, in order to build on the influential debates about the sexualised character of colonialism. She examines the way in which western imperial violence has been associated with the rhetoric of rights and democracy - a project of bombing for freedom that has called into question the validity of western conceptions of democracy, rights and feminism. Such rhetoric has given rise to actions that go beyond simply protecting western interests or securing access to scarce resources and appear to be beyond instrumental reason. The articulations of racism that appear with the war on terror are animated by fears and sexual fantasies inexplicable by rational interest alone. There can be no resolution to this seemingly endless conflict without understanding the highly sexualised racism that animates it. Such an understanding threatens to pierce the heart of imperial relations, revealing their intense contradictions and uncovering attempts to normalise violent expropriation.

Effect of mobility on violence in a bi-communal population

We develop a multi-agent based model to simulate a population which comprises of two ethnic groups and a peacekeeping force. We investigate the effects of different strategies for civilian movement to the resulting violence in this bi-communal population. Specifically, we compare and contrast random and race-based migration strategies. Race-based migration leads the formation of clusters. Previous work in this area has shown that same-race clustering instigates violent behavior in otherwise passive segments of the population. Our findings confirm this. Furthermore, we show that in settings where only one of the two races adopts race-based migration it is a winning strategy especially in violently predisposed populations. On the other hand, in relatively peaceful settings clustering is a restricting factor which causes the race that adopts it to drift into annihilation. Finally, we show that when race-based migration is adopted as a strategy by both ethnic groups it results in peaceful co-existence even in the most violently predisposed populations.