No description available.

<p>This dissertation offers an in-depth exploration of how temporality—and the imperative to control the unfolding of time in particular—is embedded in the practices, processes, and dynamics of contemporary world politics. While most International Relations scholarship remains conspicuously uninterested in questions relating to time, this study sees such temporal blindness as inhibiting the development of adequately nuanced and critically oriented understandings of key theoretical and practical issues in the global political realm. It thus attempts to demonstrate how time can be “brought in” to the study of world politics, and to highlight the analytical utility and critical potential of doing so. In this respect, Part I considers the importance of temporality to perhaps the most fundamental global political concept—state sovereignty—and then moves on to discuss how shifts in the contemporary political imagination have (re-)inscribed temporal contingency as a pressing problem that requires a political response. Part II then attempts to critically think through what is at stake in the resulting proliferation of anticipatory governance strategies premised upon controlling the unfolding of the future through pre-emptive intervention in the present. It is argued that by prioritizing imagination and conjecture in the context of political decision-making, such temporally-inflected strategies serve to radically reconfigure the way political power is organized and exercised, such that a paradigm of political authority best described as "exceptionalism” is enacted. This line of argument is developed through a comprehensive conceptual engagement with one particularly prominent manifestation of this ongoing “temporalization” of the political—namely, the “pre-emptive security” strategies that have emerged as central to the conduct of the global War on Terror. It is concluded that the adoption of anticipatory political rationalities is particularly problematic for the liberal democratic states that have most enthusiastically done so—both in the security realm and beyond.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

This dissertation explores the stereotypes of representations of Muslims in American popular culture, and specifically in television dramas and comedies. These tropes include: 1) the Muslim terrorist/villain; 2) the patriotic “Good” Muslim; 3) the Muslim “friendly cultural stereotype”; and 4) the Muslim victim (both of Western discrimination and of patriarchal “Muslim culture”). This research is also interested in portrayals of Muslims that resist these stereotypes. Taking a performativity approach based on Critical Race Theory and intersectionality, this research is interested in the intersections of race, gender, class, and sexual orientation. Following the aesthetic turn of International Relations theory and falling within the subfield of Popular Culture and World Politics, this research takes popular culture seriously as a site of politics because representational practices are important in informing politics and societal relations at local, national, and global levels. This dissertation conducts a discursive content analysis of every American television program from 2001 to 2015 that features Muslims as main and/or recurring characters, including Homeland, 24, Sleeper Cell, and The Grid. This project is timely and important because constructions of identities, including through performative reifications of stereotypes in popular culture, both influence and are influenced by foreign policy. Narratives about Muslim-ness are important in justifying Western intervention in the Middle East as part of the US-led “War on Terror”. Most recently, Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and early presidency illustrate in a visceral way the currency of negative and reductionist perceptions of Muslims, as illustrated in his proposed policies and widely spread societal and political support for a “Muslim ban”. Thus, it is important to think critically about the relationship between popular culture and world politics. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / This dissertation explores stereotypes of Muslims in American popular culture, and specifically in television dramas and comedies. These include: 1) the Muslim terrorist/villain; 2) the patriotic “Good” Muslim; 3) the Muslim “friendly cultural stereotype”; and 4) the Muslim victim (both of Western discrimination and of patriarchal “Muslim culture”). This research is also interested in portrayals of Muslims that resist these stereotypes. This project is timely and important because stereotypes about Muslims are important in justifying Western intervention in the Middle East as part of the US-led “War on Terror”. Most recently, Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and early presidency illustrate the power of negative perceptions of Muslims, as illustrated by his proposed policies and widely spread societal and political support for a “Muslim ban”. Thus, it is important to think critically about the relationship between popular culture and world politics.

This research is concerned with Pakistan's participation in the US-led 'war on terror' in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. The study seeks to explain how Pakistan's state practice in the aftermath of 9/11 was normalised and made possible. In explaining the state practice, the study draws on a constructivist conceptual framework; which is further enhanced by incorporating key theoretical insights from critical realism. In the first instance, the study proposes that Pakistan's participation in the 'war on terror', seen as a set of actions and practices, was an outcome of a specific domestic political discourse. This discourse enabled and legitimised the state's alliance with the US and its abandonment of the Taliban regime. Secondly, the study is concerned with explaining why the particular discourse emerged in the shape and form that it did. In this context, the argument is that a depth 'critical realist' ontological inquiry can reveal underlying and enduring global and domestic social structural contexts, and traces of agential influence as connected to the discourse. Consequently, this study conceptualises Pakistan's actions in the context of the 'war on terror' as emerging from a multi-causal complex in which discourse, structure and agency are complicit. The study represents a departure from realist readings that emphasise a mono-causal relationship between the US and Pakistan. Instead, this research uses a synthesis of critical realism and constructivism to add a fresh perspective in terms of how we may conceptualise Pakistan's political practice in this instance.

Esta pesquisa de Mestrado, sob a forma de dois artigos distintos, mapeia articulações da ameaça terrorista que possam sugerir a macrossecuritização da Guerra ao Terror na América do Sul, nos discursos dos presidentes de Brasil, Colômbia e Venezuela na Assembleia Geral das Nações Unidas (2002-2006). Com base na Teoria das Securitizações da Escola de Copenhague e na Análise Crítica do Discurso de vertente anglo-saxã, identificam-se as estratégias linguísticas e o encadeamento argumentativo da securitização do terrorismo no ato de fala. Conclui-se que, no nível discursivo, Colômbia e Venezuela macrossecuritizaram a Guerra ao Terror, instrumentalizando o terrorismo para justificar as ações dos Governos Uribe e Chávez , enquanto o Governo Lula absorve o terrorismo ao combate à fome. / This Master\'s research, in the form of two separate articles, maps the articulation of the terrorist threat that might suggest a macrosecuritisation of the \"War on Terror\" in South America, in the speeches of presidents of Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela in the United Nations General Assembly (2002 -2006). Based on the Theory of Securitisation of the Copenhagen School and Critical Analysis of the Anglo-Saxon Critical Discourse Analysis, it identifies the linguistic strategies and argumentative textual chaining of terrorism securitisation in the speech act. We conclude that, in the discursive level, Colombia and Venezuela have macrosecutirised the War on Terror, using terrorism to justify the actions of Uribe and Chavez governments, while the Lula embodies the danger of terrorism to its anti-hunger program.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-25T20:20:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Joao Paulo Gusmao Pinheiro Duarte.pdf: 839943 bytes, checksum: 6df14e605e542b66cb2743061baee353 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-10-20 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / This research, located in the field of international relations, discusses the forthcoming of contemporary trans-territorial terrorism and the so-called War on Terror, as an international political commitment of States seeking to contain the current terrorism and promote safety on a planetarium level. Through inquiry methods that tend to rescue origins and development of policies seeking to regulate and circumscribe war, establishing an international security, there is the current War on Terror inserted into a logic of social control that articulates combined actions of armed conflict, gross states of exception and the formalization of new rights. In this questioning, is observed the investment in the fight against terrorism through control and disciplinary mechanisms, internationalized, establishing a governmentality based on the resizing of biopolitics wich materializes it self through the implementation of preventive wars, by the use of Guantanamo Bay prison, through operationalized military interventions, by the effectiveness of many migration containment policies, by policing and monitoring of "danger zones", through the election of new permanent enemies of society. At the same time, terrorism is appointed as a political act embedded within a certain correlation of forces, which in its current resizing, articulates another authoritarian power which selects and kills. Terrorism and counter-terrorism are analyzed, therefore, from the conception of politics as war, setting the current international environment / Esta pesquisa, situada no campo das relações internacionais, aborda a emergência do terrorismo transterritorial contemporâneo e da chamada Guerra ao Terror, como um engajamento político internacional de Estados que busca conter os atuais terrorismos e promover a segurança em nível planetário. Por meio de investigação que resgata procedências e emergências das políticas que buscam regular, regulamentar e circunscrever a guerra e estabelecer um domínio da segurança internacional, observa-se a atual Guerra ao Terror inserida em uma lógica de controle social que articula ações combinadas entre conflitos armados, flagrantes estados de exceção e a formalização de novos direitos. Com tal problematização, observa-se o investimento no combate ao terrorismo através de dispositivos disciplinares e de controle internacionalizados, estabelecendo uma governamentalidade baseada no redimensionamento da biopolítica que se materializa através da execução de guerras preventivas, do uso da prisão de Guantánamo, da operacionalização de intervenções militares, da efetivação de inúmeras políticas de contenção migratória, de policiamento e monitoramento de zonas perigosas , da eleição permanente de novos inimigos da sociedade. Ao mesmo tempo, o terrorismo é apontado como um ato político inserido dentro de certa correlação de forças, mas que em seu atual redimensionamento articula outro poder autoritário que seleciona e mata. Terrorismos e contraterrorismos são analisados, portanto, a partir da concepção de política como guerra, configurando o atual ambiente internacional

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T14:53:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Joao Paulo Gusmao Pinheiro Duarte.pdf: 839943 bytes, checksum: 6df14e605e542b66cb2743061baee353 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-10-20 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / This research, located in the field of international relations, discusses the forthcoming of contemporary trans-territorial terrorism and the so-called War on Terror, as an international political commitment of States seeking to contain the current terrorism and promote safety on a planetarium level. Through inquiry methods that tend to rescue origins and development of policies seeking to regulate and circumscribe war, establishing an international security, there is the current War on Terror inserted into a logic of social control that articulates combined actions of armed conflict, gross states of exception and the formalization of new rights. In this questioning, is observed the investment in the fight against terrorism through control and disciplinary mechanisms, internationalized, establishing a governmentality based on the resizing of biopolitics wich materializes it self through the implementation of preventive wars, by the use of Guantanamo Bay prison, through operationalized military interventions, by the effectiveness of many migration containment policies, by policing and monitoring of "danger zones", through the election of new permanent enemies of society. At the same time, terrorism is appointed as a political act embedded within a certain correlation of forces, which in its current resizing, articulates another authoritarian power which selects and kills. Terrorism and counter-terrorism are analyzed, therefore, from the conception of politics as war, setting the current international environment / Esta pesquisa, situada no campo das relações internacionais, aborda a emergência do terrorismo transterritorial contemporâneo e da chamada Guerra ao Terror, como um engajamento político internacional de Estados que busca conter os atuais terrorismos e promover a segurança em nível planetário. Por meio de investigação que resgata procedências e emergências das políticas que buscam regular, regulamentar e circunscrever a guerra e estabelecer um domínio da segurança internacional, observa-se a atual Guerra ao Terror inserida em uma lógica de controle social que articula ações combinadas entre conflitos armados, flagrantes estados de exceção e a formalização de novos direitos. Com tal problematização, observa-se o investimento no combate ao terrorismo através de dispositivos disciplinares e de controle internacionalizados, estabelecendo uma governamentalidade baseada no redimensionamento da biopolítica que se materializa através da execução de guerras preventivas, do uso da prisão de Guantánamo, da operacionalização de intervenções militares, da efetivação de inúmeras políticas de contenção migratória, de policiamento e monitoramento de zonas perigosas , da eleição permanente de novos inimigos da sociedade. Ao mesmo tempo, o terrorismo é apontado como um ato político inserido dentro de certa correlação de forças, mas que em seu atual redimensionamento articula outro poder autoritário que seleciona e mata. Terrorismos e contraterrorismos são analisados, portanto, a partir da concepção de política como guerra, configurando o atual ambiente internacional

This thesis analyses the effects of international terrorism on economic and political field and illustrates them using a variety of case studies. Chapter one deals with a theoretical framework of international terrorism. Chapter two focuses on impact of international terrorism on economy, with emphasis on international trade and tourism. Chapter three is aimed to examine political responses to international terrorism and its consequences. Chapter four presents a case study about 9/11 attacks.

Given the contradictory reality of a well-developed human rights and humanitarian regime alongside extensive human rights abuses committed in the “Global War on Terror,” the dissertation asks how and why law has shaped contemporary security policy. Focusing on the American case over time, I examine this problem empirically by tracing the changing impact of both international and domestic legal and normative constraints on torture and interrogation, detention and trial, and surveillance practices, culminating in post-9/11 counterterrorism doctrine. I find that policy makers have increasingly violated rules with the adoption of controversial security and intelligence policies, but have simultaneously employed legalistic arguments to evade responsibility for human rights abuses. Using contrasting realist, decisionist, liberal, and constructivist accounts of the nature of state compliance with norms and law found in International Relations and legal scholarship, the dissertation theoretically explains this outcome and with it, law’s ability to moderate national security practice. In so doing, I propose an original reading of law as a permissive constraint, which challenges us to rethink paradigmatic assumptions in a way that accommodates both strategic and normative factors and recognizes the role of practice in giving content to rules.

Given the contradictory reality of a well-developed human rights and humanitarian regime alongside extensive human rights abuses committed in the “Global War on Terror,” the dissertation asks how and why law has shaped contemporary security policy. Focusing on the American case over time, I examine this problem empirically by tracing the changing impact of both international and domestic legal and normative constraints on torture and interrogation, detention and trial, and surveillance practices, culminating in post-9/11 counterterrorism doctrine. I find that policy makers have increasingly violated rules with the adoption of controversial security and intelligence policies, but have simultaneously employed legalistic arguments to evade responsibility for human rights abuses. Using contrasting realist, decisionist, liberal, and constructivist accounts of the nature of state compliance with norms and law found in International Relations and legal scholarship, the dissertation theoretically explains this outcome and with it, law’s ability to moderate national security practice. In so doing, I propose an original reading of law as a permissive constraint, which challenges us to rethink paradigmatic assumptions in a way that accommodates both strategic and normative factors and recognizes the role of practice in giving content to rules.