In the post Cold-War era, world politics was transforming itself through its emerging complex issues such as terrorism and influential and interdependent actors such as the European Union. In this new era, the European Union was developing its Common Foreign and Security Policy pillar both to present a coherent and unified EU policy and to prove its political potent in order to become an influential actor on world politics. On the other side, security environment was also transforming its content through emerging actors and issues. As one of the most prominent actors of the world politics, the EU was influenced by the transformation of security environment, whose economic ‘soft power’ proved necessary but insufficient for being a global power in this emerging security environment. Insufficiency of economic power in solving security problems became more visible with the terrorist attacks of September 11 and March 11 which proved the seriousness of a globalized security threat posed by terrorism. After the events took place, the EU’s security approach and threat assessment have been transformed in which the issue of terrorism occupied more profound place by ‘securitization’ of its context. The Common Foreign and Security Policy of the EU began to play more prominent role on EU policies together with incorporating the efforts on the issue of fight against terrorism both to EU’s external relations and to its security dimension. Therefore, in this study, the author analyzes the research question of the development of the CFSP of the EU together with the impact of the issue of terrorism in this transforming security environment. Since examination of such a complex security issue necessitates multidimensional approach, then liberal and realist theories are used as complementary analytical instruments guiding the theoretical framework of the study.

Post-structuralist IR has often treated foreign policy/security discourses and their effects on policy through a “representational model”, i.e. how one dominant representation makes possible particular policy outcomes. However, in a longitudinal analysis, where the concern with “outcome” is already about continuity/change, this model is restricting and must be replaced by a model integrating multiple voices and contestations, and looking for non-linear mechanisms of long-term constraints. Thus, the purpose of this thesis is, first, to develop a theoretical-analytical framework suitable for an explicit interest in contestations and tracing constraints; and second, in an illustrative-explorative study, to apply such relational-dialogical framework to “war on terror” in the US and the UK (2001-2012). Bakhtinian Dialogism occupies an important status in the framework; therefore, a broader aim is to demonstrate how a “dialogical turn” inspired by the philosophy of Mikhail Bakhtin and his circle would enrich debate. Developments of the past decade – increased anti-war critique, change of governments in the US and the UK, and protracted withdrawal – provide new grounds for a longitudinal inquiry into “war on terror”. Moving beyond the question how “war on terror” was initially constructed and legitimised, scholarly attention must focus on a longitudinal inquiry into why “war on terror” endured. In this respect, the formidable deconstructions of official discourses by anti-war critique have received marginal attention in IR. The empirical part explores how critical discourses have contested the official narratives; how the latter have engaged with them as well as with moderate deliberative critique, and to what effect for continuity/change, to understand whether and how successive governments in the US and the UK have been discursively constrained (bound) in their attempts to change policy. Without claiming to be a comprehensive explanation, it locates and interprets patterns and logics within the discursive exchanges, delineating potential routes contributing to constraints and hence continuation. Thus, on the one hand, destabilising critique was shattering the foundations of the official “war on terror” narratives without fully re-inscribing the dislocated space with new imaginings, thus inviting official representatives to re-claim such space. On the other hand, deliberative voices were pushing for the realisation of the promises inherent in the official discourse, demanding “winning” the (albeit “mistaken”) war, thus inviting for continued engagement.

Post-modern feminist security studies explore how our discourse about gender and war affects the construction of security as a concept. Military narratives valorizing the masculine over the feminine have long marginalized women warriors. In recent years, images of the torture and abuse of detainees have appropriated the representation of women interrogators during the Global War on Terrorism in particular. This research applied interpretative phenomenological analysis to the narratives of women interrogators in order to challenge the silence concerning their lived experiences by addressing how women interrogators understand their experiences both as woman and as interrogators, and how they negotiated socially constructed contradictions between these identities. Based on an analysis of semi-structured interviews with eight participants, the findings produced seven, interrelated themes. First, the findings explored the integration of gender with other markers of identity. Next, the findings demonstrated women interrogators recognize gender as a context-dependent role negotiated within the military institution through the development and demonstration of technical prowess. Then, the findings described interrogation as a complex adaptive system in which women interrogators harnessed to achieve their goals. Finally, the findings determined that the intersection of women interrogators’ identities and their interactions in the context of interrogation operations generated the perception of women interrogators as non-threatening. Women interrogators learned to exploit the meaning of this emergent phenomenon through introspection and the development of self-awareness.

In this paper, I will present a Kantian revision of the Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE). In order to do so, I will explain the concept of jus in bello – focusing in particular on the distinction between intent and foresight. I will then argue that we ought to take an agency-inspired look at the DDE. Finally, I will conclude by arguing for my thesis that Boyle’s theory of agency, while good, needs to be revised in order to accommodate concerns stemming from Kant’s Formula of Humanity… namely consent.

The trend towards the automation and robotization of warfare, enabling the exercise of violence from a distance, has been long-present, dating back to such inventions as the bow and arrow that allowed an archer to kill from afar. Today’s military drones now permit an extreme separation between rivals. James Der Derian’s concept of virtuous war encapsulates a certain normative view of current and future wars. A rationale of the actors waging virtuous war is that violence is used in a cleaner way, resulting in ever fewer battle deaths. In this thesis, I argue that the next step in the progression of military weaponry is the inclusion of artificial superintelligence (hereinafter ASI) in the American drone and counterterrorism program. While including this technology into the American war machine may represent a moral objective, I conclude that the use of ASI for military purposes is immoral because accountability becomes indeterminable.

No description available.

With the recent take back of the country by the Taliban, Afghan women’s experiences of[in]security have again become top-of mind for many. Yet, this renewed focus perpetuates anexisting imagery of Afghan women as powerless victims, with a few rebellious heroines. Thisimage, instrumentalizing women’s experiences, fuels different political agendas that are oftennot helpful to the women. To provide a more authentic image of the women’s sensemakingand experiences of [in]security, I therefore interviewed five Afghan women using a life-storymethodology where the women were included in all stages of the research process. Duringthis project, I took a feminist and critical approach to security: the woman herself defined theconcept, its impact on her life, and how she managed it. Contrary to other similar researchprojects, I asked the women about times they felt safe instead of unsafe to lessen any retraumatization, and to emphasize their opportunity for agency. Listening to the women’sstories, I interpreted the every-day as a site where they enhanced their agency in the face ofloss of control brought on by pervasive insecurities, something they described as a continuousprocess to create safe spaces. During this process, I identified an analytical pattern of how thewomen understood, and thus went about creating these safe spaces, that of adjustment andresistance. Albeit with movement between the two. This pattern shows how complex thewomen’s understanding and reaction to insecurities were as well as their responses, which iskey to understand for any future support for the women of Afghanistan.

This thesis explains how national media shape Indian foreign policy toward Pakistan. I use empirical research to explore the contribution of national media to the formulation of policy during the 1999 Kargil War and 2001 Agra Summit between India and Pakistan. I created a database of news articles in the leading national English newspapers—The Times of India and Hindustan Times and then coded and analyzed them. I analyze the media’s role by identifying trends in media strategies such as framing, agenda setting, and manufacturing consent. In addition, I analyze government documents and parliamentary debates to gather information on the policy processes and on government- media relations. I suggest that the media’s role in shaping policy depends on the level of internal dissent, understood as disagreement between the government and the opposition parties. I argue that national dissent allows the media to emerge as an independent actor, influencing the formulation of foreign policy by presenting their own opinions and policy suggestions. This was the case during the Agra Summit. On the other hand, as seen in the case of the Kargil War, during times of national consensus, the media echo the government’s voice and garner public support for the government’s actions. As such, this thesis contributes to existing scholarship and primary fieldwork by providing an original analysis of the intersection of media and foreign policy.

This dissertation offers a new understanding about wartime decision making in the face of likely, but unintended, harm to foreign civilians. It empirically identifies conditions under which leaders in democratic nations are more or less likely to choose to attack a target when confronted with a dilemma between pursuing national security objectives and avoiding civilian casualties. An innovative targeting decision model was constructed that described both the theorized structure of the decisions inputs and the process by which these inputs are assembled into a choice. The model went beyond the normal target benefit and civilian casualty cost considerations of proportionality to also include the contextual input of prospect frame. Decision makers were expected to address the same benefit and cost differently depending on whether they were winning or losing the conflict. This was because the prospect frame would influence their risk attitudes, as predicted by prospect theory. This model was then tested via two decision-making experiments that used military officers and defense civilians as participants. Additionally, a statistical analysis of data collected from an extended period of the second Intifada was done to seek evidence that the model also applied in actual wartime decision making. All three tests supported portions of the targeting decision model. Higher target benefit and lower civilian casualty estimates increased support for the planned attack. Prospect frame influenced decisions in the cases where both target value and the civilian casualty estimates were high and the resulting dilemma was very difficult. In these situations, those told that their forces were losing the conflict were less sensitive to humanitarian harm and more likely to support the attack than when they were told their side was winning. Furthermore, the Intifada data analysis of attacks approved by Israeli officials against Palestinians found this same effect of prospect frame held generally across all six years of observations.

This paper utilizes a critical (political) discourse analysis to examine security dialogue as revealed through policy; in order to facilitate this task, the following publically available political documents will be analyzed: Smart Border Declaration; Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), and the pending Beyond Borders deal. The objective is to highlight the complexities and realities of the security era as it pertains to North American border security. In other words, I am interested in the administration of border security policy in its practical context. Reviewing the Beyond Borders deal and situating it within the overall national security policies that govern the Canadian border facilitates the identification of limitations posed by the security mentality dominant in border governance. This thesis advocates that those studying border security policies in order to formulate alternative options do so in a manner that appreciates the unique polity milieu of the border. The analysis presented here has policy implications and concludes with recommendations and projections for the Beyond Borders deal. / Thesis (Master, Sociology) -- Queen's University, 2011-10-14 13:59:44.787