Post-Structuralism, Discourse Analysis and Foreign Policy

January 21, 2013

Overview

Post-structuralism

Discourse analysis in foreign policy

Post-structuralism

Reflective theory Focus on the use of language Less concerned about the “truth” of a

statement than the values and interests reflected and supported in a the statement

An example of use of language:

Maritimers are friendly

Post-structuralism

Language as power Strong empirical focus Builds a lot from realism, but also critical

of its positivist stance and efforts to universalize

Post-structuralism & realism

Draws on but also challenges aspects of the three core assumptions of realism: Groupism Egoism Power-centrism

Post-structuralism - Groupism

State stands at the core of modern political life, but argue need to understand this in historical context

Inside-outside distinction: Social contract is present inside the state, unlike between states

So tendency to see domestic politics as distinct from international politics

However, this assumption is only there because it is sustained through practices.

Historically, there are different forms of foreign policy, thus realism’s groupism assumption must be historicized.

Domestic and international are defined as the radical opposite of each other. This distinction puts difference outside the

state - what is out there is different from what it is inside the state

Groupism

Politics an foreign policy are driven by interests but those interests are “discursive”. Don’t come with our interests already established,

they are developed and articulated through our interactions and language

Dichotomies like self-interest/altruism & rational/irrational are used in ways to structure our ability to think about foreign policy as the inside-outside distinction does.

Egoism

Dichotomies are dependent on each other helping define one against the other, and often one as superior to the other Rational - irrational Foreign - domestic Us -them

Identity as constituted through foreign policy So foreign policy tells about how we see

ourselves in relation to others Leads to the idea of ‘otherness’ and how

it is created in relation to ‘our’ identity.

Implications of difference

Why would seeing another group as different, or “the other” matter to foreign policy?

How might seeing that difference impact our policy decisions or our interpretations of their actions?

Power – from capability to discourse Language as power because it is

through discourse that subjects, objects, actors and identities are being constituted

Power to marginalize the discourse of others• How might language be used marginalize

the discourse of others?

Power

Language as key to legitimizing foreign policy Helps make foreign policy appear

necessary and realistic to relevant audience

Discourse analysis

The politics of representation:

The language of foreign policy helps generate meaning of the ‘problem’ that policies are aimed at solving (e.g. head of state, countries, wars, populations).

Discourse analysis asks not whether a representation is true or false, but what the political implications of adopting a particular representation are.

The case of Saddam Hussein “We are now acting because the risks of

inaction would be far greater. In one year, or five years, the power of Iraq to inflict harm on all free nations would be multiplied many times over. With these capabilities, Saddam Hussein and his terrorist allies could choose the moment of deadly conflict when they are strongest. We choose to meet that threat now, where it arises, before it can appear suddenly in our skies and cities.” - George W. Bush

“If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until the end. In desperation, he and terrorists groups might try to conduct terrorist operations against the American people and our friends. These attacks are not inevitable. They are, however, possible. And this very fact underscores the reason we cannot live under the threat of blackmail. The terrorist threat to America and the world will be diminished the moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed.” - George W. Bush

Beside official foreign policies, discourse analysts study political parties not in government, the media, NGO’s and others who engage in foreign policy debates.

This way one gets an understanding of the positions that official foreign policy has to fight off or accommodate.

The scope and stability of foreign policy:

Canada and Afghanistan “However, what we face is the Taliban still

working to generate doubt and fear. They would like nothing better than Canada and other NATO countries to withdraw from Afghanistan. They know that the Canadian court of public opinion had tremendous influence. They are aware of our domestic discussion on this issue and they will try to exploit our debate for military gain. They can’t beat us on the battlefield. That is the only way this cunning adversary can win.” - Peter MacKay, 2007

The question of how stable a foreign policy discourse is can also be approached by looking more critically, or deconstructively, at the stability of official texts.

Stability as the “fit” between the policy advocated and its representation

Instability can create flexibility to adjust policies in the future Textual instability – the case of NATO and

Operation Unified Protector

What we consider foreign policy changes over time, and the policy on a given issue often shifts from appearance on the agenda of decision makers Through pressure at the level of the

discourse itself - e.g. the war is too costly Through changes in the foreign policy ‘issue’

itself- e.g. collapse of USSR

Change and genealogy

A genealogy starts from the present and asks how what we ‘know’ now has become ‘the’ understanding of history, and what has been excluded or marginalized by current representations.

One more example “Canadians understand that development and

security go hand in hand. Without security, there can be no humanitarian aid, no reconstruction and democratic development. Progress will be slow, but our efforts are bearing fruit…Like the North Star, Canada has been a guide to other nations; through difficult times, Canada has shone as an example of what people joined in a common purpose can achieve.”- Stephen Harper, 2007

Conclusion

Power of language Focus on analyzing foreign policies and

their contexts in detail Less concerned about the “truth” of

statements or representation and more interested in the interests and values in those representation and the implications from them.