A presente dissertação trata da relação entre democracia e poderes emergenciais tendo como análise o caso dos Estados Unidos depois dos atentados terroristas de 11 de setembro de 2001. Fundamentalmente, tratamos da expansão dos poderes do presidente norte-americano, George W. Bush, propiciada pela chamada “guerra contra o terrorismo”. Nosso objetivo é o de demonstrar como se deu essa ampliação dos poderes do presidente, tratando especificamente das questões atinentes à Ordem Militar de novembro de 2001 que possibilitou a prisão de suspeitos de terrorismo por parte das forças armadas norte-americanas e seu envio à Base Naval de Guantánamo, Cuba. Além disso, analisamos o comportamento da população, do Legislativo e do Judiciário durante a primeira administração republicana, demonstrando a fragilidade do sistema de checks and balances durantes emergências. Por fim, concluímos que ocorreu, por parte do Executivo, uma interpretação soberana da Constituição e das leis que, com o maciço apoio da população, impôs restrições ao funcionamento dos checks and balances e possibilitou a violação de direitos de cidadãos e estrangeiros, como mostrou o caso dos detentos em Guantánamo e em solo norte-americano. / This dissertation deals with the relationship between democracy and emergency powers, analyzing the case of the United States after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Fundamentally, we study the expansion of the powers of U.S. President George W. Bush, provided by the "war on terror”. Our goal is to demonstrate how did this expansion of presidential powers, dealing specifically with issues related to the Military Order of November 2001 that led to the arrest of suspected terrorists by the armed forces of U.S. and sent to the Naval Base Guantanamo, Cuba. Furthermore, we analyze the behavior of the population, the legislature and the judiciary during the first Republican administration, demonstrating the fragility of the system of checks and balances during emergencies. Finally, we conclude that occurred by the Executive, a sovereign interpretation of the Constitution and laws, with massive popular support, has imposed restrictions on the operation of checks and balances and the possible violation of rights of citizens and foreigners, as shown the case of detainees in Guantanamo and U.S. soil.

<p>Abstract</p><p>The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the way George W. Bush used moral metaphors to intensify the language in his statements on Operation Iraqi Freedom. Three moral metaphors are presented within two different models that are applied on the data.</p><p>The collected material for the metaphors is constituted of cognitive linguistic books from prominent linguists, such as George Lakoff, Alan Cruse and William Croft, and the data is collected from the official White House website. The scientific method used in this study has been qualitative text analysis where the hermeneutic approach has been an essential part of it.</p><p>The main question: In what way did George W. Bush use moral metaphors in his statements to justify Operation Iraqi Freedom?, resulted in use of moral metaphors that sermons people’s moral values, depict Saddam Hussein’s characteristics as immoral, activate people’s moral priorities to help the Iraqi people, and addresses both conservatives and liberals in America.</p><p>The conclusion of my study is that President Bush deliberately intensified the language in his statements through moral metaphors to justify Operation Iraqi Freedom.</p><p>Keywords: Cognitive Linguistics, Metaphor, Figurative Language, Operation Iraqi Freedom, War on Terror, George W. Bush, Saddam Hussein, USA, Iraq, Qualitative Text Analysis, Hermeneutics.</p>

Scholars have extensively detailed China’s conflation of the Uyghur issue in Xinjiang with the international war on terror following September 11, 2001. Less studied is how the U.S. responded to China’s framing of the Uyghur as terrorists, and of the Chinese government’s characterization of Xinjiang as a region fraught with violence and extremism. On the whole, scholars who have addressed this latter issue conclude that China successfully coopted the U.S., and consequently cracked down on Xinjiang without substantial international outrage. On the basis of a review of official U.S. documents before and after 9/11, I argue that the U.S. response to China’s framing of the Uyghur is not as clear-cut, and that multiple and conflicting U.S. responses emerged to the Uyghur-terrorist discourse. Specifically, the U.S. shifted from purely framing the Uyghur as victims of human rights abuses to projecting three new frames onto the Uyghur: victims of the war on terror; a minority group that may resort to violent methods of protest; and suspected terrorists. This new interpretation holds important ramifications for how scholars should understand China’s treatment of the Uyghur, as well as for Sino-U.S. relations.

A presente dissertação trata da relação entre democracia e poderes emergenciais tendo como análise o caso dos Estados Unidos depois dos atentados terroristas de 11 de setembro de 2001. Fundamentalmente, tratamos da expansão dos poderes do presidente norte-americano, George W. Bush, propiciada pela chamada “guerra contra o terrorismo”. Nosso objetivo é o de demonstrar como se deu essa ampliação dos poderes do presidente, tratando especificamente das questões atinentes à Ordem Militar de novembro de 2001 que possibilitou a prisão de suspeitos de terrorismo por parte das forças armadas norte-americanas e seu envio à Base Naval de Guantánamo, Cuba. Além disso, analisamos o comportamento da população, do Legislativo e do Judiciário durante a primeira administração republicana, demonstrando a fragilidade do sistema de checks and balances durantes emergências. Por fim, concluímos que ocorreu, por parte do Executivo, uma interpretação soberana da Constituição e das leis que, com o maciço apoio da população, impôs restrições ao funcionamento dos checks and balances e possibilitou a violação de direitos de cidadãos e estrangeiros, como mostrou o caso dos detentos em Guantánamo e em solo norte-americano. / This dissertation deals with the relationship between democracy and emergency powers, analyzing the case of the United States after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Fundamentally, we study the expansion of the powers of U.S. President George W. Bush, provided by the "war on terror”. Our goal is to demonstrate how did this expansion of presidential powers, dealing specifically with issues related to the Military Order of November 2001 that led to the arrest of suspected terrorists by the armed forces of U.S. and sent to the Naval Base Guantanamo, Cuba. Furthermore, we analyze the behavior of the population, the legislature and the judiciary during the first Republican administration, demonstrating the fragility of the system of checks and balances during emergencies. Finally, we conclude that occurred by the Executive, a sovereign interpretation of the Constitution and laws, with massive popular support, has imposed restrictions on the operation of checks and balances and the possible violation of rights of citizens and foreigners, as shown the case of detainees in Guantanamo and U.S. soil.

Submitted by Cristiane de Melo Shirayama (cristiane.shirayama@unifesp.br) on 2018-04-13T20:55:05Z No. of bitstreams: 1 guilherme-tadeu-de-paula.pdf: 699804 bytes, checksum: 3d098adb3ca4895cf32a9c546b301250 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Diogo Misoguti (diogo.misoguti@gmail.com) on 2018-04-17T18:06:07Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 guilherme-tadeu-de-paula.pdf: 699804 bytes, checksum: 3d098adb3ca4895cf32a9c546b301250 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-04-17T18:06:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 guilherme-tadeu-de-paula.pdf: 699804 bytes, checksum: 3d098adb3ca4895cf32a9c546b301250 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-02-05 / Este trabalho pretende analisar o conceito de terrorismo a partir de uma perspectiva crítica. O desenvolvimento dos argumentos nele encontrados se dará através de uma análise histórica, especialmente voltada para quatro períodos que mereceram especial atenção: o Terror Jacobino da Revolução Francesa, os atentados praticados por anarquistas na virada do século XIX, a imprecisão conceitual do século XX e o pós 11 de setembro e as políticas estadunidenses da época, essencialmente a Guerra ao Terror. Partindo de um pressuposto metodológico de que é a história social e as relações de poder que os homens estabelecem em sociedade que pautam e determinam os conceitos, esta pesquisa ainda dialogará com outras noções de terrorismo que apareceram no debate de nosso tempo, com o intuito de, a partir desta síntese, fundamentar uma melhor percepção que ajude a explicar as principais inquietações que motivaram este esforço analítico. O argumento central que conduzirá toda a abordagem se fundamenta no caráter político da conceituação de terrorismo, que não é um conceito límpido, científico e frio, mas sim um dispositivo de poder político em disputa em cada determinada sociedade. / This research aims to exam the concept of terrorism in a critical perspective. The development of these arguments will be found through a historical analysis, especially focused on four eras that deserve special attention: the “Reign of Terror” of the French Revolution, the attacks perpetrated by anarchists in the last decade of the nineteenth century, the broad concept of terrorism in the twentieth century and post September 11 and the U.S. policies in the age of War on Terror. Our methodological assumption is that the social history and power relations among people whitin societies that determine and rule the concepts. This research will dialogue with different ideas of terrorism that emerged in the debate of our days, and from that, to create a basis for a better perception that helps explain the main concerns that motivated this analytical effort. The main argument that lead our whole approach is based on the political aspect of terrorism concept, which is not a cloudless, pure and scientific but a kind of device of political power that can be found in each particular society.

A presente dissertação trata da relação entre democracia e poderes emergenciais tendo como análise o caso dos Estados Unidos depois dos atentados terroristas de 11 de setembro de 2001. Fundamentalmente, tratamos da expansão dos poderes do presidente norte-americano, George W. Bush, propiciada pela chamada “guerra contra o terrorismo”. Nosso objetivo é o de demonstrar como se deu essa ampliação dos poderes do presidente, tratando especificamente das questões atinentes à Ordem Militar de novembro de 2001 que possibilitou a prisão de suspeitos de terrorismo por parte das forças armadas norte-americanas e seu envio à Base Naval de Guantánamo, Cuba. Além disso, analisamos o comportamento da população, do Legislativo e do Judiciário durante a primeira administração republicana, demonstrando a fragilidade do sistema de checks and balances durantes emergências. Por fim, concluímos que ocorreu, por parte do Executivo, uma interpretação soberana da Constituição e das leis que, com o maciço apoio da população, impôs restrições ao funcionamento dos checks and balances e possibilitou a violação de direitos de cidadãos e estrangeiros, como mostrou o caso dos detentos em Guantánamo e em solo norte-americano. / This dissertation deals with the relationship between democracy and emergency powers, analyzing the case of the United States after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Fundamentally, we study the expansion of the powers of U.S. President George W. Bush, provided by the "war on terror”. Our goal is to demonstrate how did this expansion of presidential powers, dealing specifically with issues related to the Military Order of November 2001 that led to the arrest of suspected terrorists by the armed forces of U.S. and sent to the Naval Base Guantanamo, Cuba. Furthermore, we analyze the behavior of the population, the legislature and the judiciary during the first Republican administration, demonstrating the fragility of the system of checks and balances during emergencies. Finally, we conclude that occurred by the Executive, a sovereign interpretation of the Constitution and laws, with massive popular support, has imposed restrictions on the operation of checks and balances and the possible violation of rights of citizens and foreigners, as shown the case of detainees in Guantanamo and U.S. soil.

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / 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. / We wrote about our understanding what terrorism, after the September 2001 attacks, is liking as a logic and a method of action. After September 2001, terrorism has achieved a huge projection and has been integrated as a central theme in both the daily press and in international summit meetings. The phenomena was often historically confined to nations facing this problem. After 9/11, the debate has expanded and the political counter-terrorism propaganda was focused on society changing individual and collective behavior. The association between Islam and terrorism was common and the War on Terror (WOT), promoted by the American foreign policy of George W. Bush, helped to spread a perception of terrorism as an logic action of pure violence itself. The contrast between perception of the terrorist groups in previous historical periods, whose thinking to practice to terrorism was understood as an method of action with instrumental value to achieve different policy objectives, such as national emancipation and the destabilization of established political regimes. This study of Shanghai Organization (SCO) seeks to demonstrate the identification between terrorism and Islam leads to misunderstanding of understanding (a lack of comprehension) between the contemporary Islamic terrorist groups, with their own logic, and as a phenomenon only - which leads inaccurate to attribute terrorism to an first macro-securitized phenomenon character. This brief history of the rise of terrorism in contemporary political agenda has been analyzing the securitizer process both in WOT and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. This study serves as a reference about our thinking and analyzes terrorism not only can be understood in terms of the political actors involved in its definition but in the context in which they do. The SCO has a understanding about terrorism like a method of action of separatist groups, which does not correspond to the idea of terrorism as an logic of action contained in the WOT doctrine.

The aim of this paper is to assess the applicability of the Just War Tradition to a declaration of war on terrorism. The specific content that the paper will be analysing is the U.S. decision to declare war on terror in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. I will be focusing on three conditions used to justify preemptive attacks, which are essential to the Just War Tradition. (i.e. the scope of the self, the existence of evidence, and military intervention as a last resort). The method used, will be discourse analysis, focusing on how the United States justified their decision to go to war on terror. This study suggests that the U.S. justification was built upon their knowledge and use of the principles of the JWT. The findings shows that the conditions of a justified preemptive attack can be applied to the U.S. justification to declare war on terror. However, when the three conditions are applied, some important questions and implications arise. The main interpretation of the findings is that problems arise when the scope of the self is defined too widely. This, in combination with further implications, indicates that there is a need for a more structured framework in which terrorism can be analysed.

The purpose of this study is twofold: First, to inquire how the George W. Bush administration plans to keep America safe from external threats and second – based on the assumption that neoconservatives have influenced the Bush administration – examine how neoconservative ideas have influenced this strategy to protect America. The research questions are as follows: What is the content of the Bush administration’s security strategy? How are neoconservative ideas reflected in this security strategy? To answer the first question, the main points of two studied documents were summarized. The summarized documents were the two versions of the National Security Strategy of the United States of America that the George W Bush administration has released during its tenure. These documents state the official security strategy of the United States and give a general view over the threats against America and how the administration plans to deal with these threats. To answer the second question the author studied literature about neoconservatism and gained valuable knowledge about the neoconservatives, which resulted in the creation of an analyzing instrument. This analyzing instrument was later applied on the empirical material that was gathered by answering the first question and in turn answered the second question. The result of the study is that the Bush administration believes that by spreading freedom and fighting tyranny around the world, America will become safer. To accomplish this, the administration will employ the full array of political, economic, diplomatic and other tools at their disposal. Neoconservative influences on the strategy were found repeatedly – one of the most obvious influences being the administration’s adoption of the principle of preemptive strikes against enemies.

This thesis called "The United States and the strategic triangle of China-India-Pakistan" examines how the states balance mutual threats. It also focuses on the aspect of U.S.-Pakistani relationship which is a key factor for the further development of the relations in the region. Strategic triangle relations can be defined by Sino-Pakistani alliance, Sino-Indian differences and Indian-Pakistani rivalry. The work is based on a realist concept of the balance of power theory with further focus on the Stephen M. Walt's concept of balance of threat. Based on the theoretical framework, the main threats of the triangle states and the ways they balance these threats are analysed. The growing economic and military power of China and India has resulted in intense balancing, with China using an alliance with Pakistan and strengthening its economic strategies, and with India strengthening the ties with the U.S. and other countries in the region. This ignites a significant security dilemma between China and India, further leading to a potential conflict. The paper further argues that the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan is key for maintaining regional balance. Therefore, to maintain the strong ties with Pakistan, a setting of long-term U.S. strategy in Pakistan is crucial for increasing the...