The language of neofeudal corporatism and the war on Iraq

In this paper we argue that the term “capitalism” is no longer useful for understanding the current system of political economic relations in which we live. Rather, we argue that the system can be more usefully characterised as neofeudal corporatism. Using examples drawn from a 300,000 word corpus of public utterances by three political leaders from the “coalition of the willing”— George W. Bush, Tony Blair, and John Howard—we show some defining characteristics of this relatively new system and how they are manifest in political language about the invasion of Iraq.

Introduction to special issue on what criminology can say about the war on terror

On 20 September 2001, the former US President, George W. Bush, declared what is now widely, and arguably infamously, known as a ‘war on terror’. In response to the fatal 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington, DC, President Bush identified the US military response as having far-reaching and long-lasting consequences. It was, he argued, ‘our war on terror’ that began ‘with al Qaeda, but … it will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated’ (CNN 2001). This was to be a war that would, in the words of former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, seek to eliminate a threat that was ‘aimed at the whole democratic world’ (Blair 2001). Blair claimed that this threat is of such magnitude that unprecedented measures would need to be taken to uphold freedom and security. Blair would later admit that it was a war that ‘divided the country’ and was based on evidence ‘about Saddam having actual biological and chemical weapons, as opposed to the capability to develop them, has turned out to be wrong’ (Blair 2004). The failures of intelligence ushered in new political rhetoric in the form of ‘trust me’ because ‘instinct is no science’ (Blair 2004). The war on terror has been one of the most significant international events in the past three decades, alongside the collapse of the former Soviet Union, the end of apartheid in South Africa, the unification of Europe and the marketization of the People's Republic of China. Yet, unlike the other events, it will not be remembered for advancing democracy or sovereignty, but for the conviction politics of particular politicians who chose to dispense with international law and custom in pursuit of personal instincts that proved fatal. Since the invasions of Afghanistan in October 2001 and …

Valkoisen talon kappalaiset : Yhdysvaltain presidentti-instituution viralliset puheet retorisena kansalaisuskontona

Tutkimuksen aihepiirinä on viimeaikaisen (1997-2004) Yhdysvaltain presidentti-instituution uskonnollinen retoriikka William J. Clintonin ja George W. Bushin virkakausina. Tutkimuksen tehtävä on selvittää, miten presidentti-instituutio hyödyntää uskonnollista retoriikkaa legimitaationa virallisissa poliittisissa linjanvetopuheissaan, kuten virkaanastujais- ja liittovaltion tila -puheissaan. Tutkimustehtävä jakautuu seuraaviin alakysymyksiin: 1) Millaisilla kansalaisuskonnollisilla käsityksillä ja keinoilla legimitaatiota yritetään tuottaa? 2) Ovatko kansalaisuskonnon keinot viimeaikaisten presidenttien keskeisintä työvälineistöä identifioinnissa ja erottautumisissa? 3) Ovatko kansalaisuskonnolliset teemat naturalisoituneet, luonnollistuneet? Tiivistetysti on tarkoitus tutkia viimeaikaisten presidenttien virallisista puheiden kautta, kuinka uskonto ja valtio liittyvät toisiinsa. Perusolettamukseni on, että presidentit hyödyntävät keskeisesti kansalaisuskonnollista retoriikkaa vakuuttaakseen yleisönsä ja politiikkansa. Tutkimusaineisto koostuu koostuu kahden Yhdysvaltain presidentin William J. Clintonin (1993-2001) ja George W. Bushin (2001-) presidenttien virallisista puheista, jotka on pidetty vuosina 1997-2004. Viralliset puheet ovat virkaanastujais- (Inaugural Address) ja vuosittaiset liittovaltion tila -puheet (Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union). Puheita on kymmenen ja niiden pituus on keskimäärin viisi sivua. Tutkielman teoreettinen viitekehys tukeutuu kanadalaisen uskontososiologin Marcela Cristin uudenlaiselle käsitykselle (2001) kansalaisuskonnosta poliittisena uskontona. Tämä hyödyntää kansalaisuskonnon durkheimilaista taustaa yhdistäen Jean-Jacques Rousseuaun religion civile-teesiä. Cristin mukaan kansalaisuskonto manifestoituu kahdella tavalla: sekä durkheimilaisena kulttuurisena kansalaismuotona (civil) ja rousseualaisena ideologiana (political). Nämä eivät hänen mukaansa ole toisilleen vastakohtia, vaan yhden jatkumon osia. Tutkielman metodologinen lähestymistapa on uusretorinen analyysi ja teoreettis-medologisena viitekehyksenä on sosiaalinen konstruktivismi. Analyysin perusolettamus on, että presidentti-instituution luomassa merkityksen rakennetaan sosiaalisesta todellisuutta. Instituution retoriikka suuntautuu tiettyyn sosiaaliseen yhteisöön yrittäen legimitoida mahdollisimman laajaa joukkoa politiikkansa taakse. Analyysin tuloksena huomattiin, että presidentti-instituutio hyödyntää aktiivisesti kansalaisuskonnollisia teemoja. Molempien presidentti-instituutioiden uskonnollisessa nationalismissa hyödynnetään kansalaisuskonnollisuuden sekä protestanttis-puritaanista että valistuksellista taustaa. Kyse on oikeastaan siitä,kuinka nämä puolet saavat painotuksensa. Selvää on, että molemmat presidentit hyödyntävät kaikkia kansalaisuskonnollisuuden kolmea ulottuvuutta. Molemmilta löytyy retorinen tukeutuminen transsendenssiin, moraalistinen yhteisöllisyyden vaatimus. Clintonin uskonnollinen retoriikkaa jakaantuu kahteen ulkoisesti ristiriitaiseen käsitteelliseen linssiin: lupauksellisuus ja perustajallisuus. Ne yhdistyvät hänen nimittämisissään millenniaaliseksi yhteisöksi. Bushin uskonnollinen retoriikka tukeutuu transsendenttiseen ulottuvuuteen. Hänen käsitteelisiä linssejä ovat aktiivisen Jumalan monet roolit ja ajan siunauksellisuus. (Ks. luku 8. johtopäätökset ja jatkotutkimus.) Avainsanat: Yhdysvallat, presidentti-instituutio, kansalaisuskonto, uskonnollinen retoriikka, William J. Clinton, George W.Bush

We Are All Georgians : The Neoconservative Narrative on the Russia-Georgia War

In this thesis I examine the U.S. foreign policy discussion that followed the war between Russia and Georgia in August 2008. In the politically charged setting that preceded the presidential elections, the subject of the debate was not only Washington's response to the crisis in the Caucasus but, more generally, the direction of U.S. foreign policy after the presidency of George W. Bush. As of November 2010, the reasons for and consequences of the Russia-Georgia war continue to be contested. My thesis demonstrates that there were already a number of different stories about the conflict immediately after the outbreak of hostilities. I want to argue that among these stories one can discern a “neoconservative narrative” that described the war as a confrontation between the East and the West and considered it as a test for Washington’s global leadership. I draw on the theory of securitization, particularly on a framework introduced by Holger Stritzel. Accordingly, I consider statements about the conflict as “threat texts” and analyze these based on the existing discursive context, the performative force of the threat texts and the positional power of the actors presenting them. My thesis suggests that a notion of narrativity can complement Stritzel’s securitization framework and take it further. Threat texts are established as narratives by attaching causal connections, meaning and actorship to the discourse. By focusing on this process I want to shed light on the relationship between the text and the context, capture the time dimension of a speech act articulation and help to explain how some interpretations of the conflict are privileged and others marginalized. I develop the theoretical discussion through an empirical analysis of the neoconservative narrative. Drawing on Stritzel’s framework, I argue that the internal logic of the narrative which was presented as self-evident can be analyzed in its historicity. Asking what was perceived to be at stake in the conflict, how the narrative was formed and what purposes it served also reveals the possibility for alternative explanations. My main source material consists of transcripts of think tank seminars organized in Washington, D.C. in August 2008. In addition, I resort to the foreign policy discussion in the mainstream media.

We Are All Georgians: The Neoconservative Narrative on the Russia-Georgia War

In this thesis I examine the U.S. foreign policy discussion that followed the war between Russia and Georgia in August 2008. In the politically charged setting that preceded the presidential elections, the subject of the debate was not only Washington's response to the crisis in the Caucasus but, more generally, the direction of U.S. foreign policy after the presidency of George W. Bush. As of November 2010, the reasons for and consequences of the Russia-Georgia war continue to be contested. My thesis demonstrates that there were already a number of different stories about the conflict immediately after the outbreak of hostilities. I want to argue that among these stories one can discern a “neoconservative narrative” that described the war as a confrontation between the East and the West and considered it as a test for Washington’s global leadership. I draw on the theory of securitization, particularly on a framework introduced by Holger Stritzel. Accordingly, I consider statements about the conflict as “threat texts” and analyze these based on the existing discursive context, the performative force of the threat texts and the positional power of the actors presenting them. My thesis suggests that a notion of narrativity can complement Stritzel’s securitization framework and take it further. Threat texts are established as narratives by attaching causal connections, meaning and actorship to the discourse. By focusing on this process I want to shed light on the relationship between the text and the context, capture the time dimension of a speech act articulation and help to explain how some interpretations of the conflict are privileged and others marginalized. I develop the theoretical discussion through an empirical analysis of the neoconservative narrative. Drawing on Stritzel’s framework, I argue that the internal logic of the narrative which was presented as self-evident can be analyzed in its historicity. Asking what was perceived to be at stake in the conflict, how the narrative was formed and what purposes it served also reveals the possibility for alternative explanations. My main source material consists of transcripts of think tank seminars organized in Washington, D.C. in August 2008. In addition, I resort to the foreign policy discussion in the mainstream media.

Os efeitos políticos da securitização internacional do terrorismo pós-11/09: o caso da Organização de Cooperação de Xangai

Esta dissertação trata do que se entende como terrorismo após os atentados de setembro de 2001, seja como lógica de ação ou como método de ação. A partir desta data, o terrorismo alcançou enorme projeção e passou a figurar como tema central tanto na imprensa cotidiana quanto em reuniões internacionais de cúpula. O fenômeno era, muitas vezes, historicamente circunscrito às nações que enfrentavam esse problema. Após o Onze de Setembro, o debate expandiu-se e as políticas, e a propaganda, antiterroristas incidiram sobre a sociedade, modificando comportamentos individuais e coletivos. A associação entre Islamismo e terrorismo foi frequente e a Guerra Contra ao Terror (GCT), promovida pela política externa norte-americana de George W. Bush, contribuiu para difundir uma percepção do terrorismo como uma lógica de ação afeita à violência em si. Isso contrasta com a percepção quanto a grupos terroristas de momentos históricos anteriores, cujo recurso ao terrorismo era compreendido como método de ação com valor instrumental para alcançar objetivos políticos diversos, como a emancipação nacional e a desestabilização de regimes políticos estabelecidos. O estudo de caso da Organização de Xangai (OCX) visa demonstrar que a identificação entre terrorismo e Islã leva ao equívoco de compreender os grupos terroristas contemporâneos islâmicos, com lógicas próprias, como uma fenômeno só o que leva à imprecisão de atribuir ao terrorismo o caráter de primeiro fenômeno macro-securitizado. Este breve histórico da ascensão do terrorismo na agenda política contemporânea, mediante a análise do processo securitizador tanto na GCT quanto na Organização de Cooperação de Xangai, serve como referência para as análises contidas no trabalho que o leitor tem em mãos, uma vez que o sentido atribuído ao terrorismo só pode ser entendido em termos dos atores políticos envolvidos na sua definição e no contexto em qual o fazem. Na OCX, o verificou-se o entendimento do terrorismo como método de ação de grupos separatistas, o que não corresponde à ideia do terrorismo como lógica de ação contida na GCT.

Bycatch provisions in the reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Act

Bycatch can harm marine ecosystems, reduce biodiversity, lead to injury or mortality of protected species, and have severe economic implications for fisheries. On 12 January 2007, President George W. Bush signed the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 (MSRA). The MSRA required the U.S. Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to establish a Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program (BREP) to develop technological devices and other conservation engineering changes designed to minimize bycatch, seabird interactions, bycatch mortality, and post-release mortality in Federally managed fisheries. The MSRA also required the Secretary to identify nations whose vessels are engaged in the bycatch of protected living marine resources (PLMR’s) under specified circumstances and to certify that these nations have 1) adopted regulatory programs for PLMR’s that are comparable to U.S. programs, taking into account different conditions, and 2) established management plans for PLMR’s that assist in the collection of data to support assessments and conservation of these resources. If a nation fails to take sufficient corrective action and does not receive a positive certification, fishing products from that country may be subject to import prohibitions into the United States. The BREP has made significant progress to develop technological devices and other conservation engineering designed to minimize bycatch, including improvements to bycatch reduction devices and turtle excluder devices in Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico trawl fisheries, gillnets in Northeast fisheries, and trawls in Alaska and Pacific Northwest fisheries. In addition, the international provisions of the MSRA have provided an innovative tool through which the United States can address bycatch by foreign nations. However, the inability of the National Marine Fisheries Service to identify nations whose vessels are engaged in the bycatch of PLMR’s to date will require the development of additional approaches to meet this mandate.

Koncepcja imperium w neokonserwatywnej myśli politycznej w okresie prezydentury George’a W. Busha

Wydział Nauk Politycznych i Dziennikarstwa: Zakład Stosunków Międzynarodowych

Representing War as Punishment in the War on Terror

This paper shows how the notion of punishment has been invoked by former US President George W. Bush, and ex UK Prime Minister Tony Blair to represent war. It is suggested that in this context, the notion of punishment serves different objectives: legitimizing violence, suggesting the sovereign role taken by the US and highlighting the emergence of new sensibilities. Building on previous literature in criminology and international relations it examines points of contact between two previously distinct security mechanisms - war and punishment- and suggests possible effects of this discursive blurring. It highlights not only the need for criminologists to engage with international relations literature but also the need to evaluate closely the different nature of the international context.

Presidential power and congressional acquiescence in the "war" on terrorism: a new constitutional equilibrium?

US presidents have expanded executive power in times of war and emergency,sometimes aggressively so. This article builds on the application of punctuated equilibria theory by Burnham (1999 and Ackerman (1999). Underpinning this theory is the notion that rapid changes in - or external shocks to - domestic and international society impose new and insistent demands on the state. In so doing, they produce important and decisive moments of institutional mobilization and creativity, disrupt a pre-existing, relatively stable, equilibrium between the Congress and the president, and precipitate decisions or nondecisions by the electorate and political leaders that define the contours for action when the next crisis or external shock occurs. The article suggests that the combination of President George W. Bush's presidentialist doctrine, 9/11 and the 'war' on terror has consolidated a new, constitutional equilibrium. While some members of Congress contest the new order, the Congress collectively has acquiesced in its own marginalization. The article surveys a wide range of executive power assertions and legislative retreats. It argues that power assertions generally draw on precedent: on, for example, a tradition of wartime presidential extraconstitutional leadership extending to presidents, such as John Adams and Abraham Lincoln,as well as to Cold War and post-Cold War presidentialism.

Entre “Nós” e os “Outros”: o excecionalismo americano como enquadramento identitário das narrativas securitizadoras das migrações nos Estados Unidos da América no pós-11 de Setembro, 2001-2013

O fim da Guerra Fria e em particular os ataques terroristas de 11 de Setembro de 2001 foram importantes aceleradores de um constante (e já longo) processo de crescente securitização das fronteiras e migrações nos EUA, que por sua vez teve impacto na forma como as elites políticas norte-americanas conceberam a identidade nacional do país, ancorada na ideologia da excecionalidade da experiência e do destino americanos e associada a uma posição dirigente do país nos assuntos externos, o excecionalismo americano. As migrações internacionais são relevantes neste contexto porque expõem a tensão inerente entre a necessidade dos Estados-nação protegerem o seu território e a sua população e a impossibilidade fazer esse controlo de forma perfeita, em especial num mundo globalizado; e as dificuldades em manter uma identidade nacional homogénea quando se partilha a comunidade política com membros que à mesma são alheios/estrangeiros (imigrantes). Esta dissertação analisa as relações entre o excecionalismo americano como visão do mundo primacial para a conceção de identidade das elites políticas americanas e a crescente securitização das migrações no período pós-11 de Setembro de 2001, em especial até 2013. A análise empírica centra-se numa análise crítica do discurso (recorrendo à abordagem discursivo-histórica da Escola linguística de Viena) de textos com caráter discursivo criados pelos dois Presidentes (George W. Bush e Barack Obama) e utilizando-os como base para uma discussão acerca das formas como as narrativas securitizadoras foram justificadas pelos atores políticos norte-americanos e se o excecionalismo americano continua o paradigma através do qual essas elites veem o mundo e segundo o qual alinham as suas posições nos recorrentes debates públicos sobre as políticas de segurança e de imigração dos EUA. No fim da dissertação, concluir-se-á que a securitização das fronteiras e migrações foi e continua a ser justificada por narrativas excecionalistas, o que favorecerá a sua permanência e crescimento ao longo dos próximos anos. Ainda assim, a continuada existência de proponentes de visões alternativas à dominante e o carácter fluído do conceito de excecionalismo podem eventualmente permitir uma inversão de curso no futuro que favoreça o fortalecimento da liberdade e dos direitos cívicos nos EUA.

La controverse avant le film : quelle politique pour Good Night, And Good Luck ?

This article aims to explain how newspapers commented on the movie Good Night, and Good Luck before its release. The media coverage anticipated George Clooney's film as a partisan attack launched against George W. Bush's policy since 9/11. Clooney advocates another reading: the historic confrontation between journalist Edward Murrow and Senator Joseph McCarty permits to reflect on the crucial role that the media play for democracy. Such reflection tries to prevent the dividing of the public sphere into antagonistic camps opposing "friends" to "foes," a division that undermines the possibility of a true pluralism. Our socio-semiotic analysis will focus on the critical work accomplished by the media, and on the way that work determines the collective meaning of a cultural object. Simultaneously, we will discuss the necessary conditions for pluralism in a public sphere.

Heroes on the home front : heroism and virtue in post-9/11 American cinema /

This thesis is intended to contribute to critical discussion of the American male hero in mainstream American war and action films post September 11, 2001 . The thesis investigates how these heroes' behaviour echoes a patriotic, conservative construction of the modern American as created through speeches given by George W. Bush in the wake of the events of September 11, 2001 . The thesis examines the hero in six primary sources: the war films We Were Soldiers, Behind Enemy Lines and The Great Raid and the action films Collateral Damage, Man on Fire and The Punisher. By analyzing the ideological subtext, political content, visual strategies and generic implications of the films, as well as the binary constructions of a selection of Bush speeches, and by reviewing historical representations of American male heroes on film produced in the wake of political events, the thesis concludes that the six films mobilize the USA's conservative viewpoint towards war and military action, and in concert with the speeches, contribute to an ongoing militarization of visual culture. Both systems echo a dangerous ideological fantasy of American history, life and patriotism.

The DPRK in China's post-cold war foreign policy - a neoclassical realist analysis

Avec l’échec des négociations entre les États-Unis et la Corée du Nord, menées depuis le début des années 1990, sur la question du nucléaire, le problème est devenu graduellement l’affaire des pays voisins, tous soucieux de l’avenir de la région du sud-est asiatique. Présentée comme le seul allié de la Corée du Nord, la China a été invitée à participer à des négociations à trois, à quatre (1997-1998), et à six (2003-2007), dans l’espoir de faire entendre raison au régime isolé, mais jusqu’à maintenant, aucune des tentatives n’est parvenue à satisfaire chacun des membres à la table. Alors que la tension monte et que la politique américaine se fait de moins en moins flexible, la Chine quant à elle, continue d’encourager le retour des négociations à six (Six-Party Talks) dans l’optique de dénucléariser la péninsule coréenne, tout en travaillant à maintenir ses liens avec la Corée du Nord. Le fil conducteur de cette présente recherche est d’abord d’essayer de comprendre pourquoi la Chine continue de soutenir la Corée du Nord, fournissant dons alimentaires et financiers. L’idée est donc d’analyser, selon les principes du réalisme néoclassique, la politique étrangère de la Chine. L’hypothèse principale de cette théorie renvoie à l’idée que la distribution du pouvoir dans le système international influence la politique étrangère des États, mais que des variables au niveau de l’état et/ou de l’individu interviennent dans la formulation et l’application de celle-ci. Il est proposé ici que le lien entre l’unipolarité du système international et la politique nord-coréenne de la Chine, est façonné par des variables intermédiaires telles que : a) la perception des leaders de la distribution du pouvoir et de leur place dans le système international; b) l’idéologie du régime politique, et; c) le type d’unité responsable de la prise de décision en politique étrangère. L’analyse de chacune des variables permettra de faire la lumière sur les intérêts politiques et économiques de la Chine dans l’entretien de cette relation avec la Corée du Nord.

Análisis de las Relaciones Bilaterales entre México Y Estados Unidos en materia de lucha antidrogas, durante el periodo 2006–2010

Monografia de Grado sobre la cooperación bilateral entre Mexico y Estados Unidos en materia de seguridad desde el 2006 al 2010. Análisis a las políticas del gobierno de Felipe Calderon, George W. Bush y Barack Obama.