India and the dialectics of domestic and international “land grabbing”: Historical perspectives,current debates,and the case of Ethiopia

International land “acquisition” or land “grabbing” has become a global phenomenon in which India plays an increasingly important role. While there is a critical domestic debate regarding land deals within India — especially pertaining to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act of 2014 — there is practically no such debate regarding international land deals by Indian companies in Sub-Saharan Africa. By applying a two-level discourse analysis, this article argues that the land discourse within India can be understood as a strategy of exclusion. By linking land issues with questions of “development,” the discursive strategies of powerful actors lead to the exclusion of the arguments of NGOs and others opposed to the land deals from the discourse within India. This strategy of exclusion is then taken to the extreme with the strategy of securitization outside India: land deals are linked to “food security,” as the example of Ethiopia highlights.     

Autocratic legitimation in Iran: Ali Khamenei’s discourse on regime “insiders” and “outsiders”

The article analyses Ali Khamenei’s discourse on insiders and outsiders in the Islamic Republic of Iran, arguing that it shows the leader of an electoral revolutionary regime striving to counter elite fragmentation and growing democratic demands. It studies identity demarcation as a tool of autocratic legitimation. In a political system where the possibility to access political positions depends on supporting a belief-system, all cadres share a basic identity, which rulers can exploit to draw boundaries between “us” and “them”. The analysis reveals how Iran’s leader capitalizes on the existence of an insider-outsider divide to promote ideas about an imagined “we” of the regime. The “we” is portrayed as an Islamic we, fully committed to his rule. The article maintains that Khamenei developed this discourse in response to the challenge of the Iranian reform movement. It analyses, first, the context in which the discourse emerged and, second, the discursive strategy itself, to substantiate the claim. It concludes that the discourse had two essential aims in the containment (1997–2003) and crushing (2009–2010) of the pro-democracy reformist and Green movements: to de-legitimate Khamenei’s opponents through othering and to legitimate the counter-mobilization of repressive agents.     

De-antagonising the Other: Changing Constructions of the Taliban and the Possibility of Reconciliation

Shortly after 9/11 any kind of engagement, let alone reconciliation, with the Taliban was considered absurd. Recently, however, Afghan as well as Western elites have announced that they are now willing to talk to parts of the Taliban in an attempt to begin a reconciliation process in Afghanistan. This article focuses on the discourse theoretical framework developed by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe and illustrates the merits of such an approach for explaining how such a shift became possible. It argues that the turn to reconciliation with the Taliban was enabled by a transformation of the discursive construction of the Taliban. The article focuses on the discursive dynamics of the (de)coupling and differentiation of signifiers as a central mechanism of meaning production. It argues that antagonistic identity constructions in the context of the global war on terror formed the discursive background against which the Taliban were first articulated as part of the terrorist “Other”, which made any engagement impossible. From 2009 onwards, however, it can be observed how the signifier “Taliban” was decoupled from the identity of the “terrorist”, how it transcended the antagonistic frontier and came to be seen as an entity worthy of engagement.     

“Getting off the Tiger”: The Spanish Transitional Model and its Influence on the Democratic Transitions in Argentina and Chile, 1977–1990

The article explains how the Spanish transition from dictatorship to democracy, as a “model” for a political reform devoid of transitional justice, informed the Argentine and Chilean democratic transition of the 1980s. It indicates that during the mid-1980s, Spanish figures promoted Spain’s “pacted transition” in Latin America within particular intellectual networks. While ultimately failing to impact the Argentine democratisation, the Spanish discourse of “consensus” made a more salient impact in Chile during the late 1980s. The goal of this article is ultimately to suggest that while Chilean reformers designed their transitional model building on both the Spanish and Argentine precedents, their discourse bore a strong consistency with the core principles of the Spanish political reform, a fact that should be attributed to a decade of Chilean-Spanish dialogue.     

海洋话语与国际秩序转变

国际关系的演进表明,海洋话语转变是国际秩序转变的重要风向标。文章对海洋话语进行了概念分析,并将其细分成海洋硬话语与海洋软话语,明确其包涵因素和互动关系。战争、谈判、国际会议、条约及协定等是国家争取战略主导权、在国际权力格局中占据优势的重要手段,可作为海洋话语与国际秩序之间的互动机理。海洋话语与国际秩序转变主要经历了欧洲主导时期和美国主导时期,且美国主导时期延续至今。在“百年未有之大变局”时代,海洋世界多极化趋势显著,海陆联动明显,“泛海洋时代”到来;海洋话语的话语主体、结构设计、海缘范畴及议题领域等均在经历多维嬗变,国际海洋新秩序建构的可能性和必要性在不断提升。中国需把握好角色定位与策略选择,优化中国海洋战略,树立新海洋安全观,踏实构建海洋话语,在国际海洋新秩序的构建中发挥积极引领作用。     

BORROKA—The Legitimation of Street Violence in the Political Discourse of Radical Basque Nationalists

The present article analyzes the discourse employed by the left-wing nationalist movement in Spain's Basque Country to legitimize the use of street violence for political ends. I distinguish four “faces” of legitimation (“ex ante” vs. “ex post,” “for us” vs. “for others”) and argue that in a situation of radicalization of politically inspired (terrorist) violence, the discourse developed to justify violent action is principally meant for the organization's own following, and less to communicate with the outside world. Basque militants claimed that their strategy of political and military radicalization in the 1990s had been responsible for recent political successes of their movement.     

Visual rehumanisation: torture and terror in In the Name of the Father and Fifty Dead Men Walking

This article explores the use of torture by both state and non-state actors during the Northern Irish Troubles as visualised in two films, Jim Sheridan’s In the Name of the Father (1998) and Kari Skogland’s Fifty Dead Men Walking (2009). Using the concept of “acknowledgement” as developed by Stanley Cohen, this article argues that the visualisation of torture not only draws the issue out from the shadows, but challenges the dehumanisation process which can facilitate passive acceptance of the use of torture where there exists a threat to the integrity of the political and moral community.     

“New Terrorism” = Higher Brutality? An Empirical Test of the “Brutalization Thesis”

This article focuses on the so-called “brutalization” of terrorism. The brutalization thesis as part of the larger theoretical concept of “new terrorism” argues that “new terrorism” is more brutal than “old terrorism.” Many scholars claim that the 9/11 attacks mark the beginning of a new era of terrorism that has lifted international as well as domestic terrorism to a new level of violent brutality. Others argue that this process had already started in the early 1990s. After discussing possible ways to operationalize a brutalization of terrorism, for example focusing on suicide bombings or terrorist attacks against soft targets, this article tests the empirical credibility of the brutalization thesis regarding both potential starting points. Data from the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) shows that only three out of nine indicators increased significantly during the 1990s, partially backing the idea of a general brutalization, whereas increasing numbers of suicide attacks and beheadings after 9/11 support the notion of a qualitative change in terrorism and its brutality connected with the idea of maximizing media and public attention. Yet, these developments are regionally limited and the brutality of this “new terrorism” exceeds the levels known from the zenith of “old terrorism” in the 1970s and 1980s in only a few cases.     

The Human Security Tale of Two Europes

If the concept of human security is to be meaningful, it must be applicable to any region, developing or developed. Such was the point of departure for authors of two reports on Western and Eastern Europe that were commissioned by UNESCO as part of a series of regional reports aimed at detailing the human security situations in different regions. The present article, compiled by the co-authors of both reports, summarises the reports and critically revisits this premise. By exploring the notion that human security varies according to national, regional and local settings, thus gaining meaning from the context in which the framework is applied, it poses a number of critical questions about the universality of the concept of human security. It argues for a supple concept of human security capable of identifying vulnerabilities in a variety of settings and adapting legitimate responses to them. By exploring the applicability of human security in Eastern and Western Europe it sets out to test the limits of the concept and to contribute to ongoing debate about “broad” and “narrow” conceptions of human security and addresses the criticism of the concept as ideologically skewed. The paper first addresses the subjective question of what human security means in the Western and Eastern European contexts before outlining in broad terms the objective question of what is concretely taking place in Europe. It concludes by suggesting that human security actually lends itself equally to the developed world where mid- or large-scale physical violence is less common as a source of insecurity, concluding that many of the threats faced are of similar nature, if of varying degrees of severity.     

CTS and normativity: the essentials of preemptive counter-terrorism interventions

This article critically assesses calls for “normativity” in counter-radicalisation and counter-extremism, and suggests that aligning with hegemonic narratives about securing the “pre-crime” space is problematic in a context of emancipation. Utilising interviews with a number of Prevent officials (including Channel “de-radicalisation” mentors), the article argues that when any counter-radicalisation regime is implemented, two traits are necessarily inherent: identity construction, and “concerned concern”, both of which are based on subjective speculation about an individual’s future intent. Identity construction in preemptive counter-terrorism works through prejudiced human imagination in order to normalise perceived and “risky” divergence, but which is mired in contradictions precisely because practitioners interpret risk (and therefore divergence) differently. Concerned concern is a paradoxical constitution both of support for and protection against individuals. Ultimately, in exploring these two concepts, the article critically engages with the notion that Prevent is “just another safeguarding duty”. Building on earlier critical terrorism scholarship, this discussion shows how worst-case logics apparent in national discourse are largely absent at the point of implementation, yet pejorative identity-construction and some suspicion (no matter how banalised) are implicit in any risk-managing scheme in a counter-terrorism context. These qualities are incompatible with an emancipatory agenda.     

From Hasbara to the Palestine-Israel Sport Conflict

This analysis highlights the role of sport—particularly football—in nation-building. Using netnographic techniques, it focuses on the Palestinian struggle for self-determination and nationhood through the efforts of the Palestinian Football Association [PFA] to challenge Israeli hegemony and function independently of Israeli surveillance in a sovereign Palestinian nation-state. It explains how the PFA has attempted to harness its status, manifested in its Fédération Internationale de Football Association [FIFA] membership, to threaten Israel’s own FIFA membership and its international image. The value of this analysis stems from the way it embeds the empirical narrative within a broader international relations analytical/theoretical framework that problematises the central concept of “soft power” that has predominated the current “sports and international relations” literature.     

The Concept of Radicalization as a Source of Confusion

The ubiquity of use of the term “radicalization” suggests a consensus about its meaning, but this article shows through a review of a variety of definitions that no such consensus exists. The article then argues that use of the term is problematic not just for these reasons, but because it is used in three different contexts: the security context, the integration context, and the foreign-policy context. It is argued that each of these contexts has a different agenda, impacted in the case of the integration agenda by the rise of European “neo-nationalism,” and so each uses the term “radical” to mean something different. The use of one term to denote at least three different concepts risks serious confusion. The proposed solution is to abandon the attempt to use “radicalization” as an absolute concept.     

Is development studies becoming too brainy? A comparison of World Development Reports

This article argues that two types of “brainisation” hinder development studies researchers in their phronetic understanding of poor people’s realities. It first provides a literature review on two types of knowledge and their differences, as well as two types of brainisation and how they prevent development studies scholars gaining a holistic understanding of the marginalised. Subsequently, a comparative analysis is conducted on two World Development Reports. Finally, alternative scenarios are outlined for the “debrainisation” of development studies and researchers’ mind-sets by learning from the fundamental features of human life.     

Caught between the urgent and the comprehensible: professionals’ understanding of violent extremism

The present article focuses on how 13 professionals in key organisations in Sweden – all commissioned to design social and pedagogical efforts to prevent recruitment to terror groups that commit violence in the name of Islam – understand and reason regarding the root causes of recruitment and possible measures to counteract it. The 13 informants’ reasoning is analysed through critical discourse analysis, the aim being to investigate discursive practices that influence the construction of a Swedish discourse on the “prevention of violent extremism”. The analysis shows that in the informants’ reasoning, a conflict can be found between security-driven doctrines that strive to individualise the issue of “violent extremism”, and their understanding that segregation is the primary, though indirect, factor sparking “radicalisation”. This conflict seems to impair the use of a professional language to describe and talk about the practical methodology that the informants are developing.     

Shaking off the neoliberal shackles: “democratic emergence” and the negotiation of democratic knowledge in the Middle East North Africa context

ABSTRACT

There is a general assumption in democracy promotion that liberal democracy is the panacea that will solve all political and economic problems faced by developing countries. Using the concept of “good society” as analytical prism, the analysis shows that while there is a rhetorical agreement as to what the “good society” entails, democracy promotion practices fail to allow for recipients’ inclusion in the negotiation and delivery of the “good society”. Contrasting US and Tunisian discourses on the “good society”, the article argues that democracy promotion practices are underpinned by neoliberal parameters borne out from a reliance on the transition paradigm, which in turn leave little room to democracy promotion recipients to formulate knowledge claims supporting the emergence of alternative conceptions of the “good society”. In contrast, the article opens up a reflective pathway to a negotiated democratic knowledge, which would reside in a paradigmatic change that consists in the abandonment of the transition paradigm in favour of a “democratic emergence” paradigm.     

Security in the name of human rights: the discursive legitimation strategies of the war on terror in France

This article aims to question the discourse on “the war on terror” developed by the French President in the wake of the two terrorist attacks that occurred in France in 2015. Drawing from critical discourse analysis, it explores the discursive legitimation strategies deployed by President Hollande to legitimate France’s securitarian response to the two attacks. It reveals how the defence of human rights served as an overall justificatory framework, through rationalisation, appeals to authority, and moralisation. It argues that Hollande implemented a discursive manipulation of reality to shield his actions from criticisms of illiberalism, all the while reframing the notion of human rights, undermining it and paving the way for an authoritarian-driven executive.     

Resilience as the new EU foreign policy paradigm: a pragmatist turn?

This article examines the rise of resilience discourses in EU foreign policy. The European Union Global Strategy (EUGS) refers to building state and societal resilience in its neighbourhood as one of the key strategic priorities of the EU. This article argues that the discourse of resilience that permeates the EUGS chimes well with a pragmatist turn in social sciences and global governance. The EUGS introduces resilience-building alongside an emphasis on flexibility, tailor-made approaches and the need for local ownership, capacity-building and comprehensiveness. More importantly, the new EUGS proposes “principled pragmatism” as a new operating principle in its foreign policy. While this might suggest a more pragmatic EU foreign policy, a closer examination of the EUGS discourse reveals significant tensions between a pragmatic and a principled foreign policy, which undermine the added value of resilience-building as a new foreign policy paradigm.     

Propaganda,effect, and the cold war: Gauging the status of america's “war of words”

The article examines the interrelationship among propaganda, effect, and the Cold War during congressional debates over America's first peacetime propaganda program. Although the rise of the communication research paradigm affected the production of statistical evidence to measure the effectiveness of America's Cold War propaganda, this case study argues that the “war of words” metaphor further heightened the need for empirical proof of America's status in that conflict, Just as with any physical battle that relies on body counts and land measurements to determine the success of America's war efforts, the criteria for measuring the status of America's “war of words” were driven by a similar demand for “objective” proof. The longevity of the Cold War helped ensure the institutionalization of the communication research paradigm, which rejected the use of anecdotal evidence as support for the program's impact.     

The Path to Political Substance: Exploring the Mediated Discourse Surrounding Controversial Media Texts

This article proceeds from the assumption that entertainment texts—particularly controversial ones—function in a broad intertextual field and that their political significance does not lie solely in their value as stand-alone texts, or in their direct influence on political knowledge, attitudes, opinions, and behaviors, but in their ability to instigate politically relevant discussions in other media venues. Focusing on the mediated discourse surrounding two controversial U.S. docudramas, The Reagans and The Path to 9/11, this study examines the political qualities of the public discourse surrounding these docudramas in the U.S. news media and investigates which factors were significant predictors of political substance in this discourse. Based on a distinction between “issue substance” and “media substance” as the two major types of political substance that emerge in the discourse surrounding controversial texts, the analysis demonstrates how these types of political substance varied across the two docudramas and across various dimensions of the discourse, among them the time in which the discussion took place. The analytical framework presented in this article is offered as a platform for future examinations of the contribution of media-centered political scandals to public discourse, the conditions under which entertainment texts spur substantive political discussions, and the complex interactions between journalism, entertainment, and politics in contemporary media environments.     

A history of drones: moral(e) bombing and state terrorism

This article argues that an historical investigation of air power makes possible the critique of current regimes of drone surveillance and bombing as a practice of state terrorism. By identifying certain key themes regularly used in terrorism studies for the classification of violence as “terrorism”, this article shows that early air power theorists understood military aircraft as essentially instruments of terrorism. A central argument permeating these theorists’ conception of air power was that the military value of aviation lay in its capacity to target the enemy’s population and, by means of bombing, generate a significant “moral effect” – that is, a psychological effect against the morale of civilians. This strategic formula constituted a central component of British air control schemes during the interwar period, where terror bombing was deployed systematically in order to control and pacify colonial populations. In arguing that widespread and long-lasting terror remains an inalienable feature of air power, this article concludes with a call for a critique that accounts for the fact that current deployments of armed drones – for instance, the US “targeted killings” programme – effectively reproduce these historical and material conditions of terrorist violence.