The Gender Logics of Resistance to the ‘War on Terror’: constructing sex–gender difference through the erasure of patriarchy in the Middle East

Abstract

This article asks, ‘How are femininities constructed in resisting the “war on terror” and with what implications for women's agency and the conceptualisation of gender?’ It examines the under-studied gender logics of non-violent resistance to the ‘war on terror’ by focusing on a series of conferences held in Cairo, between 2002 and 2008, uniting opposition to imperialism, Zionism, neoliberalism and dictatorship. Whereas much feminist scholarship conceptualises sex–gender difference within patriarchy as the major source of women's subordination, women speakers at the Cairo conferences erased patriarchy as a source of subordination and valorised sex–gender difference as a source of agency in resisting the ‘war on terror’. Femininities were constructed against the dominant narratives and practices of the war on terror through the representation of national/religious or class differences. These ‘resistance femininities’ represent strategically essentialised identities that function to bridge differences and mobilise women against the ‘war on terror’.     

Law transformed: Guantánamo and the ‘other’ exception

Guantánamo Bay is almost unanimously seen as an exceptional space inhabited by ‘bare life’. This article unpacks the double rendering of the exception in Carl Schmitt's work and argues that the conceptualisation of the exception in The Nomos of the Earth can help us understand the form of exception that is at work in the ‘war on terror’. The nomos as the junction of order and orientation appears as a way of closing off the space of political decision from Schmitt's earlier concept of the political. The constitution of order is no longer dependent upon the sovereign decision on the exception, but upon the division and appropriation of space, upon the geopolitics of uncontested spatialisations and a philosophy of concrete life. Therefore, Guantánamo will be exposed not as a singular and exceptional occurrence, but as symptomatic of the transformation of law. Law is moulded onto the order of what is; it is sustained by the situational characteristics of spaces and people at a distance from the contingency of sovereign decisions.     

How the United States justified its war on terrorism: prime morality and the construction of a ‘just war’

Just war theory has a long established reputation in the social sciences for evaluating the morality of the military actions of states. However, this analysis has rested upon assumptions of territorial sovereignty and the equal rights of states. The actions of hegemonic powers violate these twin assumptions through their expression of extra‐territorial reach. To avoid charges of immoral behaviour hegemonic powers must use the just war rhetoric of territoriality to justify their extra‐territorial acts. A world‐systems theory conceptualisation of hegemony allows for an interpretation of hegemonic military actions as the defence of a universal prime modernity. Prime modernity refers to an ideal organization of society projected by the hegemonic power as a form of integrative power. For the hegemonic power, threat is perceived as a rejection of the prime modernity anywhere rather than the language of border violations that dominates the foundations of just war theory. Using the language embedded in government and non‐government documents justifying the War on Terrorism, the manner in which a hegemonic power constructed military extra‐territoriality in a system of sovereign states as just is examined. The development of a ‘prime morality’ allowed the hegemonic power to claim that it was operating at the scales of the individual and ‘humankind’ rather than inter‐state power politics. The analysis challenges the implicit geographic assumptions of just war theory and extends our understanding of the imperatives underlying the hegemonic power's construction of its military actions as morally right.     

The Syrian wars of words: international and local instrumentalisations of the war on terror

Abstract

This article presents a study of the ‘wars of words’ among selected parties involved in the Syrian conflict. Based on a combination of content analysis and critical discourse analysis (CDA), it examines actors’ discourses within the United Nations Security Council (2011–2015), the global arena of confrontation and international legitimisation of armed actions. Here, it investigates their instrumentalisation of the word ‘terrorism’ and the war on terror narrative, and it explores the dynamics of discursive (de)legitimisation of the use of violence in Syria. The article shows how parties instrumentalised this narrative to criminalise their enemies while legitimising their own violent actions. By doing this, the paper also offers a broader reflection on the global narrative on terrorism, and its different reception and instrumentalisation by core and peripheral actors.     

Al-Qaida, ‘war on terror’ and Turkey

The new wave of international terrorism gained strength in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, threatening not only the USA and its allies but also, as seen in the latest incidents, a significant part of the world. Continuing al-Qaida attacks signify the vulnerability and weakness of defence, security and intelligence systems in the face of the new international terror. The terror network has created an image of a postmodern virtual state. We argue that it has been shaped by a common ideology rather than in physical terms. Thus it is necessary to develop novel approaches. In this article we discuss Turkey's struggle against the new terror, underlining the fact that it is a Muslim majority state and has lively and dynamic Islamic traditions and different shades of Islamic belief. This situation makes the discussion more interesting, focusing on the position, perception, difficulties and struggle of a Muslim state with a democratic and secular mode of government vis-à-vis an allegedly Islam-inspired international terror network. There is an urgent need to develop an international terror strategy to counter terror attacks against Turkey, Britain, Egypt and others. We underscore the vital requirement of reconciling the macro-schemes and priorities of the global ‘war on terror’ with the national conditions and needs of the other countries involved in the struggle against the terror network.     

The Concepts of State and Society in Defining Russia’s Domestic Political Unity: A Research Note

Abstract

Vladimir Putin’s long period in power has so far raised scant discussion about the political concepts that underpin real state and societal unity, and especially about the domestic political implications of these concepts. Despite this, key concepts of his political regime, such as ‘sovereignty’ and ‘sovereign democracy’, have frequently been used in Russian political discourse. This essay examines the way the current Russian administration has used concepts that stress strong societal unity, and the creation of a stable state and societal unity to support the development of real functioning dynamics in the society. It charts the shift from ‘sovereign democracy’ to ‘sovereignty’ around 2011–2012 as a key discursive concept in moving towards a more isolationist international stand and consolidating Putin’s power by emphasising Russia’s unique political tradition, which requires a strong leader as the basis of national unity and to ensure Russian sovereignty.     

Fear of a black planet: anarchy anxieties and postcolonial travel to Africa

Western travel to Africa has historically involved the construction and consumption of African otherness. In the postcolonial era this is most clearly evident in Western tourism to the continent, where Africa is frequently marketed as an exoticised destination to see and consume both ‘nature’ and ‘native’. The Western tourist gaze often requires fixing Africans, both in a spatial site (‘village’) and a temporal site (‘tradition’). Africans on the move (both spatially and temporally) are often seen as threatening to the Western‐established images of Africa, which are grounded in a long‐standing fear of ‘unorded’ and ‘chaotic’ African space. After 11 September and the USA's ‘war on terror’ retributive response, the political implications of these fears are evinced in the writings of Robert Kaplan and his popular ‘coming anarchy’ thesis. The article concludes with a critique of Kaplan's work and a discussion of its implications for Africa and African international relations.     

If not by tanks,then by banks? The role of soft power in Putin's foreign policy

This article considers the benefits of the recently developed concept of ‘soft power’ in understanding Russia's foreign policy. It argues that claims that Moscow is exercising a form of soft power imperialism in the former Soviet region cannot be fully supported by the existing evidence. To differentiate between the imperialist and stabilising objectives of Russian foreign policy the article analyses the Russian domestic discourse on exploiting soft power in foreign policy. It then compares the views of different schools of thought with Vladimir Putin's philosophy and foreign policy record. Finally, it selects for closer investigation Russia's policy in the Caucasus.     

The Rise of Militant Islam and the Security State in the Era of the ‘Long War’

This paper distinguishes between political and militant Islam and analyses the latter's current ability to confront empire and to become a social force in Muslim-majority states. This analysis is within the dialectic of collaboration and resistance, starting with client postcolonial states' pivotal role in bringing to fruition the collaboration between political Islam and US imperialism during the cold war era. The post-cold war period signals the imperialist putsch to confront militant Islam in the ‘Long War’ by employing the cold war strategy of ‘permanent war’ and universalising the idea of the security state. Militant Islam's resistance to the Long War and the security state makes this two-pronged imperial strategy a losing proposition for the USA. Paradoxically this strategy has also become the prime mover for militant Islam's ascendancy. The paper addresses the paradox of the USA's continuation with its losing Long War strategy and securitisation agenda which, although providing succour to militant Islam, is also achieving its larger objectives to buttress capitalist globalism; fuel the military–industrial and security–industrial complexes; and support ‘big oil’.     

Critical Review: the politics of sovereign debt

In this article, I interrogate what is meant by ‘the politics of sovereign debt’, and examine how various authors, especially David Graeber, have addressed this question. More specifically, I seek to extend my contribution to the goals of the ‘Repoliticizing Debt’ workshop, which inspired this special issue, by proposing a theoretical framework for understanding the role of sovereign debt in mediating the contradictions of neoliberal capitalism, and by challenging dominant treatments of the sovereign debt crisis currently underway in Greece. I argue that the existing literature fails to help grasp the complexity of sovereign debt as a social relation, and that debt must be understood as what Marx refers to as ‘fictitious capital’, that is, capital backed not by a commodity transaction, but by a claim on future value. The management of confidence in the value of fictitious capital through the use of the ‘golden noose’ of debt is the key process to be understood in order to grasp the complexity of sovereign debt crises.     

The horror of ‘horrorism’: laundering metropolitan killings

Abstract

Modern colonialism carries many names. But ‘horror’ is not one of them. How and why is this? Why does the slaughter of the ‘native’, the ‘Indian’ and the ‘slave’ not register as crime or horror? This essay explores these questions though a close reading of philosopher Adriana Cavarero’s Horrorism: Naming Contemporary Violence. Horrorism has become an increasingly influential source for critical international scholarship concerned with broadening the frames of violence beyond those offered by strategic and legalistic lenses. Its focus on the dismemberment of the body and discovery of a new form of ontological violence offer a fruitful avenue of inquiry for theorising the wounding and violation wrought by practices of terror and counter-terror. This essay cautions against such a supposition. A close reading of the key claims and conditions of possibility of horrorism reveals it to be constituted through the erasure of colonial violence. Tracing the lineaments of this erasure shows that horrorism functions not as a sign of newness but of Western revanchism in a time of crisis. However, this does not make horrorism redundant, for it offers valuable insights for understanding the pervasive failure to consider the horrors perpetrated by the West against non-Western others.     

State crimes against democracy in the war on terror: applying the Nuremberg principles to the Bush–Cheney Administration

This article asks whether, in waging war in the Middle East, the Bush–Cheney Administration developed and executed a conspiracy comparable to the one for which Nazi leaders were tried, convicted, and executed at Nuremberg after World War II. To meet the Nuremberg standards, such a conspiracy must include efforts to subvert the constitutional order. Today, scholars refer to these actions as ‘state crimes against democracy’ (SCADs). After explicating the Nuremberg standards, the article applies them to the Bush–Cheney Administration's ‘war on terror’. The conclusion reached is that evidence of a SCAD-driven conspiracy is extensive and certainly adequate by the Nuremberg standards to warrant investigations and trials.     

Bush's America and the New Exceptionalism: anti-Americanism,the Holocaust and the transatlantic rift

This article examines how the USA's growing ‘Holocaust consciousness’ has impacted on conservative interpretations of the transatlantic rift. Presenting the Holocaust as an antipode to US national identity has helped signal a moral divergence between the USA and Europe. The instrumentalisation of the Holocaust and anti-Semitism has allowed US conservatives to reframe norms of self-defence, victimisation, and liberation in justifying the invasion and occupation of Iraq. In the wake of Iraq claiming anti-Semitism as a ‘European disease’, and anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism as ‘twin brothers’, helps delegitimate European criticism of the war on terror. A new form of exceptionalism portrays the USA not only as the liberator of death camps and the protector of the Jewish people but, after 11 September, as a victim itself.     

Disrupting civility: amateur intellectuals,international lawyers and TWAIL as praxis

Abstract

This paper is a reflection on the role of intellectuals in engaging with Palestinian solidarity movements and liberation discourses, and on the place of international lawyers specifically within that context. The paper considers ‘the question of Palestine’ as a rigorous test for intellectuals in the Global North today, and examines particular debates over free speech, civility and balance that unfolded in the wake of Israel’s 2014 war on Gaza. It considers the interventions of international lawyers in these debates with reference to Edward Said’s ‘amateur’ and ‘professional’ intellectuals, and explores ways in which anti-colonial international lawyers (as amateur intellectuals) can transcend prevailing professional orthodoxies to deploy language, arguments or tactics that rupture liberal legal processes and narratives on Palestine.     

The dark(er) side of ‘state failure’: state formation and socio-political variation

Scholars concerned with the formation of states, specifically the relationship between state formation and war, hold one of two positions. Some agree with Charles Tilly’s historiological conclusion that war is decisive for the establishment of stateness and specify key concepts, in order to explain presumed discrepancies between past and present. Others point towards the international sphere in its current form and advocate a ‘war breaks states’ perspective. This paper argues that both standpoints neglect the ‘sub-national’ level. While proponents of the ‘war breaks states’ thesis are missing para-sovereign zones of rule, supporters of the ‘war makes states’ approach take a juridical view of statehood and focus on ‘state strength’. The failed states paradigm guiding contemporary security and development policy hinders an adequate analysis of the actual situation on the ground. Discussing the shortcomings of failed states approaches and state formation theorising, the paper proposes a conceptualisation in terms of socio-political variation instead of a mere dichotomisation of order. Some conclusive questions are raised, indicating future research directions linked to the historical sociology of state formation.     

Imperial governance,sovereignty and the management of chronic instability in Africa

An important political consequence of the crisis of capital in the 1970s has been an increasing intensification of informal imperialism within Africa. This paper argues that the advanced capitalist countries again confronted the endemic problem of overcapacity alongside a decline in the rate of profit and that the major neoliberal reforms foisted upon the African continent were part of the spatio-temporal fix that followed. The quotidian management of many African states was not an intended consequence of structural adjustment, but the subsequent perturbations that beset many developing countries after following such policies has led to such a degree of institutional instability that a new form of imperial governance has come into being. Juridical sovereignty has been maintained, but political sovereignty has been severely compromised through the emergence of this neo-imperial governance. Today an array of external actors is embedded in the sinews of these states, setting the general parameters of state policy to such an extent that one can no longer speak of these countries as possessing de facto independence. The rise of these so-called ‘governance states’ and the new emphasis on ‘governance with government’ constitute a new non-territorial, political form of imperialism.     

Globalized fears,localized securities: ‘Terrorism’ in political polarization in a one-party state

Partisanship has become the dominant ideological incentive to political polarization. Likewise, the analytical association between polarization and the party system in electoral democracies has focused, in most of the existing literature, on political polarization, leaving aside authoritarian or semi-authoritarian contexts where a fair multi-party election is absent or dysfunctional. By collecting and analyzing online posts about international terrorism from Sina Weibo in China, between January 2011 and December 2016, this study proves the existence of opinion polarization on terrorism in China's digital media sphere. By categorizing the findings into two camps, ‘global war on terror discourse’ and ‘anti-imperialist narrative’, the study elucidates these polarized attitudes in terms of their acceptance, denial and decomposition of the global discourse of fears about terrorism. Drawing on our case study, the study then proposes an alternative explanation for the motivation/driver of mass polarization in digitally networked communication in China, identified as the effect of globalization and localization.     

The post-cold war predicament: A conclusion

The 1997 Asian economic crisis discredited the international discussion about ‘Asian values’ in Pacific Asia, replacing it with a globalised ‘good governance’ discourse. The financial breakdown undermined claims by Asian autocrats that government should be based on authoritarian ‘Asian values’, not ‘Western democracy’. Yet, seven years later, authoritarian regimes in the region are flourishing while the new democracies flounder. Why have dictatorships, not democracies, prospered politically since the Asian financial crisis? Pacific Asia began as an ‘imagined community’ of developmental dictatorships, making authoritarian development the ‘original position’ against which democratic governance is judged. While the demise of ‘Asian values’ contributed to the fall of the Suharto regime in Indonesia, it did less harm to authoritarian regimes in more economically developed Malaysia and Singapore. The US‐led anti‐terror coalition provided several authoritarian rulers in Pacific Asia with welcome support from the West, while allowing them to weaken internal opposition. The new democracies, by contrast, faced international pressures to combat terrorism, often arousing local protest. Finally, middle class‐based reformist movements have risked destabilising the region's new democracies in the name of good governance.     

The moral purpose of US power: neoconservatism in the age of Obama

The ‘neoconservative moment’ is widely assumed to have come and gone with the George W. Bush administration. This article argues, however, that the hope that the neoconservative chapter in US foreign policy will be definitively closed under Barack Obama's administration is unlikely to be realized in practice, owing to the continuing influence that neoconservatives are able to exercise over national debates regarding the ‘moral’ use of US power in order to shape the international environment. While the moral agenda of the ‘neocons’ is often misconceived as simply a mask for the naked pursuit of the United States' material and strategic interests, this article demonstrates that this misrepresents the rationale that underpins the neoconservative perspective. Exploring the re-articulation of morality in neoconservative thought reveals the nexus that both links the neoconservative domestic agenda for political change to its foreign policy goals and also provides a framework for understanding the ‘staying power’ that neoconservatism continues to exhibit. Although the Obama presidency is widely heralded as a repudiation of this agenda, the neoconservative conception of the United States as a moral power is deeply rooted in US foreign policy traditions and is domestically allied to traditional expressions of social conservatism, which enables neoconservative ideas to continue to resonate in US foreign policy debates.     

The Boko Haram Uprising: how should Nigeria respond?

Since the execution of Osama bin Laden and a few other al-Qaeda kingpins, the incidence of international terrorism seems to be on the decline and the ‘war on terror’ has been applauded as a huge success, with some even arguing that terrorism will fizzle out sooner rather than later. But recent experiences in Nigeria and some other African states reveal that, while global terrorism may be on the decline, the proliferation and radicalisation of local terrorist groups with possible links to al-Qaeda seem to be on the rise. The quest for effective counter-terrorism therefore continues. This article interrogates how Nigeria should respond to the Boko Haram terrorist uprising. Methodologically it relies on both primary and secondary sources of data. It provides an overview of the evolution and dynamics of the uprising in Nigeria, and explores the motivations, strategic operations and responses of Boko Haram. The article shows that the uprising, which engenders general insecurity, is a consequence of governance failure and institutional fragility. Thus, it concludes that, to effectively address the uprising, Nigeria should adopt a human security approach rather than the current emphasis on a repressive state security approach.