The Adaptation of Political Theory:

The Traditional Form vs. The Post-Cold War Form

Definition: When a group of people is united by a common hatred of a perceived or real external threat.

Part of human nature [seen even on a biological level]

On an international level, it involves the recognition of an enemy tied to some form of geopolitical border.

Traditionally a by-product of war (i.e. WWI, WWII, Cold War)

First recorded use as a separate tactic [opportunism] was the Holocaust.

Used in both inter-state and intra-state conflict

Used for opportunism, not necessity

Ideology as enemy Best known modern use:

President Bush’s failed attempt at uniting his country against the “Axis of Evil”

Deemed useless after the end of the Cold War

Back

Questions to be Answered: What enemies have been targeted by this tactic?

What type of enemies have they been? (i.e. another nation, a rival ideology, etc.) Where is this tactic still being used?

What is the Common Enemy? Is the traditional definition of the Common Enemy

no longer applicable? Is Bush’s failure at redefining the common enemy

enough to assume the tactic dead? Did this tactic die with the end of the Cold War? What has caused the need for a shift in the

definition of the “Common Enemy”? How has the changing face of “Enemy” affected this definition?

Back

Thesis Statement[The west has failed in their

attempt to utilise the common enemy tactic in the post-Cold War world. While the tactic is not dead, it may no longer be used in its traditional form.] In order for the west to salvage it, the common enemy tactic must be altered to account for modern globalization, selective vilification, and political opportunism.

Back

I - Modern GlobalizationEvidence:“Neoliberal Economic globalization is undermining the sovereignty of the nation-state.” “The increasingly globalized world economy calls for a similarly globalized approach to basic ethics and social procedures.” “...requires the creation of broader coalitions, alliances and solidarity among movements from many countries.”

Counters:The limits opposed on the West by globalization make it impossible to name an enemy that will effectively unite the people.Globalization has put such a divide between a government and its people, that in the west, too many people are against their government’s actions to be unified by such a “simple” tactic.

Back

II – Selective VilificationEvidence: Quotes from book “Enemy with a thousand faces: the history of the other in western political thought and history.” State enemies throughout history, draw own conclusions

Counters:You can’t fight an enemy if it’s intangible.Historically, the targeted enemy has been fought through a war. With a borderless enemy, a war cannot be waged against it, therefore the people will not be affected in the same manner.

Back

III – Political Opportunism Evidence:

[On the Middle East] “The region is against America and the west; the whole region with no exception.” Several fundamentally different movements [ie. Jihadism, communism, facism, extreme nationalism, etc.] “have come together to face off with their ultimate common enemy: democracy.” [On Genocide] By making the enemy appear to be an actual threat, or making it feared, the group dynamic changes, increasing togetherness, respect for leaders, idolization of group values, and readiness to punish deviants from in-group norms. “Leaders were able to mobilize followers by playing up threats and reminding their people of negative past experiences, making fear seem more realistic, and even provoking the enemy to acts that would confirm these fears.”

Counters:Both case studies focus on third-world areas. The different level of education, and the awareness of bias in the media makes the tactic significantly less likely to work in the west.Regardless to whether the enemy is by chance or plan, it must be physically fought for the tactic to work. The ideological enemy of Western society cannot be fought in this manner.

Back

Works Cited ListBarkawi, Tarak. Globalization and War. USA: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2006.

Barkawi, Tarak. Globalization and War. USA: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2006.

Chirot, Daniel, and Clark McCauley. Why Not Kill Them All? the Logic and Prevention of Mass Political Murder. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2006.

Cumings, Bruce, Ervand Abrahamian, and Moshe Ma'Oz. Inventing the Axis of Evil: The Truth about North Korea, Iran, and Syria. New York: The New Press, 2004.

Curtis, Neal. War and Social Theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

Denton, D. Keith. "HITLER'S SECRET, EINSTEIN'S FEAR: USING ENEMIES TO EMPOWER TEAMS AND ORGANIZATIONS. " Competitiveness Review. 10.2 (Summer-Fall 2000): 209. General OneFile . Gale. York Region District School Board. 6 Sept. 2007 <http://find.galegroup.com/ips/start.do?prodId=IPS >.

Guelke, Adrian. Terrorism and GLobal Disorder. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.

Harle, Vilho. The Enemy with a Thousand Faces: The Tradition of the Other in Western Political Thought and History. Connetticut: Praeger Publishers , 2000.

Maoz, Zeev et al. "What Is the Enemy of My Enemy? Causes and Consequences of Imbalanced International Relations, 1816-2001." Journal of Politics (March 2006): <http://www.journalofpolitics.org/files/69_1/Maoz-etal.pdf>.

McGrew, Anthony, and Nana K. Poku, Ed. Globalization, Development and Human Security. Massachusetts: Polity Press, 2007.

Moïsi, Dominique. "Reinventing the West." Foreign Affairs (Nov/Dec 2003): <http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20031101faessay82607/dominique- moisi/reinventing-the-west.html>.

Petrov, Alex. The Common Enemy. 7 Apr. 2005. 18 Sep. 2007<http://alexpetrov.com/memes/hum/cmn_enemy.html>.

Phares, Walid. The War of Ideas: Jihadism Against Democracy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

Strauss, Mark. "Antiglobalism's Jewish Problem." Foreign Policy (Nov/Dec 2003): <http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=182&page=0>.

Vanaik, Achin. Selling US Wars. Massachusetts: Transnational Institute, 2007.

Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars. Virtual Archive: Discussion Between Zhou Enlai, Chen Yi, Pham Van Dong and Vo Nguyen Giap. 2007. 17 Sep. 2007 <http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?topic_id=1409&fuseaction=va2.document&identifier=5034C9E5-96B6-175C-9744AB37C5B35708&sort=Collection &item=The%20Vietnam%20(Indochina)%20War(s)>. Back

Navigation

Background Info

Questions

Thesis

Argument I

Argument II

Argument III

Works Cited