ENEMY ADDICTION: Outsider Threats, Security Frames, and Target Audiences in Contemporary US Security Policy
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Warwick
Department Name: Politics and International Studies
Abstract
Perceptions of insecurity are a key source of violent conflict and international instability. This project investigates the US preoccupation with security threats after the Cold War ended, and how the discursive redefinition of the post-Cold War landscape in terms of danger and uncertainty has locked the US into perpetuating expensive security practices - even in times of severe economic crisis. It is centred on two important and interrelated puzzling issues in international security today:
1. Following the end of the Cold War, the US moved swiftly to redefine the new security environment in terms of threats. What made this possible?
2. State and non-state actors at the margins of international society can be portrayed as major threats to international peace - without posing a significant military challenge to those who 'frame' them as enemies. How is this possible?
Exploring America's enemy addiction in the post-Cold War era, this project seeks to unlock these puzzles through investigating in a systematic, empirically and methodologically rigorous fashion what role policy language plays in fostering the emergence, promotion, and public acceptance of specific threat scenarios and security policy agendas.
How does security language lead to security practices? Past scholarship that aimed at showing the importance of security discourse for everyday security politics has struggled to make this relevant beyond a narrow academic audience. This project develops a novel multidisciplinary mixed-methods research design that moves discourse analysis beyond a concern with semantic language-centrism to link security discourse to policy formulation, political strategy, and security policy consequences. On the one hand this serves to foster the development of the discipline through illustrating how a multidisciplinary discourse analysis that generates original datasets and offers a high degree of empirical detail can be utilized to develop a more benign scientific realism. On the other hand, this serves to demonstrate to the policy community, journalists, academic audiences, and the wider public the importance of how political agents speak.
In addition to its immediate contribution to understanding policy language as a key endogenous source of security practices, the project will also enable a deeper and empirically reinforced understanding of timely and important questions in international security, such as:
- To what extent is security policy a reaction to 'objective' changes in the international structure?
- How can 'narrating' specific events in the international arena foster the construction of external security threats?
- Does policy language matter in marginalizing political resistance?
- Can 'speaking' international security differently change security policy practices?
The project builds upon my previous research, which showed that security policy language aids political agents to advance specific policy agendas by fostering consensus- and coalition-building processes. Using US post-Cold War security policy as an empirical focal point, this project integrates three analytical stages of discourse - characteristics, scope conditions, and effects - to show how security discourses are operationalized by (and for) different policy audiences, and what practical implications this has. By increasing knowledge of how, when, and why the rhetorical choices political agents make successfully shape security policy agendas, this project can help to unlock the puzzle of 'enemy addiction' to foster policy alternatives.
1. Following the end of the Cold War, the US moved swiftly to redefine the new security environment in terms of threats. What made this possible?
2. State and non-state actors at the margins of international society can be portrayed as major threats to international peace - without posing a significant military challenge to those who 'frame' them as enemies. How is this possible?
Exploring America's enemy addiction in the post-Cold War era, this project seeks to unlock these puzzles through investigating in a systematic, empirically and methodologically rigorous fashion what role policy language plays in fostering the emergence, promotion, and public acceptance of specific threat scenarios and security policy agendas.
How does security language lead to security practices? Past scholarship that aimed at showing the importance of security discourse for everyday security politics has struggled to make this relevant beyond a narrow academic audience. This project develops a novel multidisciplinary mixed-methods research design that moves discourse analysis beyond a concern with semantic language-centrism to link security discourse to policy formulation, political strategy, and security policy consequences. On the one hand this serves to foster the development of the discipline through illustrating how a multidisciplinary discourse analysis that generates original datasets and offers a high degree of empirical detail can be utilized to develop a more benign scientific realism. On the other hand, this serves to demonstrate to the policy community, journalists, academic audiences, and the wider public the importance of how political agents speak.
In addition to its immediate contribution to understanding policy language as a key endogenous source of security practices, the project will also enable a deeper and empirically reinforced understanding of timely and important questions in international security, such as:
- To what extent is security policy a reaction to 'objective' changes in the international structure?
- How can 'narrating' specific events in the international arena foster the construction of external security threats?
- Does policy language matter in marginalizing political resistance?
- Can 'speaking' international security differently change security policy practices?
The project builds upon my previous research, which showed that security policy language aids political agents to advance specific policy agendas by fostering consensus- and coalition-building processes. Using US post-Cold War security policy as an empirical focal point, this project integrates three analytical stages of discourse - characteristics, scope conditions, and effects - to show how security discourses are operationalized by (and for) different policy audiences, and what practical implications this has. By increasing knowledge of how, when, and why the rhetorical choices political agents make successfully shape security policy agendas, this project can help to unlock the puzzle of 'enemy addiction' to foster policy alternatives.
Planned Impact
The project seeks to reframe the way in which policy language in international security is studied and understood in order to raise awareness of the importance of 'speaking' (inter)national security for security policy decisions, such as on the level of military expenditures, strategic planning decisions, and the use of force. The following target audiences are expected to benefit from this:
(1) IS/IR Scholars: The project contributes to scholarship that challenges the mainstream understanding of security policy as unlike other areas of public policymaking, and as largely insulated from societal pressures and parochial interests. In particular through its in-depth empirical investigation of the role of policy language in security policy processes and practices, it will benefit scholars within traditional and critical IR/IS fields engaged in exposing the everyday complexity of security policy. Impact will be achieved through high-profile publications and vigorous knowledge-exchange activities in the international academic community. Timescale: Years 1-3
(2) Wider Academic Community: Through its multidisciplinary mixed-method research design to analysis discourse, the project benefits scholarship that seeks to both move discourse analysis beyond language-centrism and disintegrate existing methodological and disciplinary 'divides' in the social sciences in favour of problem-driven research. Project-impact will be achieved through fostering interdisciplinary knowledge-exchange activities at the University of Warwick, the UK, and beyond. Timescale: Years 1-3. Long-term impact will be achieved through enhancing my methodological skill set aimed at establishing my reputation as a facilitator of interdisciplinary research in IS as a pathway to increase the stakeholder relevance of social research. Timescale: Years 3+
(3) Policy Practitioners and Advisors: Security policy decisions have significant social and financial implications, and depictions of enmity lie at their core. Gaining knowledge of their agenda-setting and consensus-building effects to foster 'enemy addiction' is an important tool for political agents seeking to raise public awareness of the politics of threat construction, for example in debates over limiting the scope of security policy to open up new pathways for policy alternatives. The project will also benefit those engaged in collecting public opinion survey data and aim at limiting framing effects contained in security policy question. Impact will be achieved through yearly policy briefs, the knowledge-transfer activities of the project's Speaking International Security network, and creating knowledge transfer partnerships with US think tanks. I will undergo training in media relations to maximize the effectiveness of communicating project aims and results to end-users. Timescale: Years 1-3+
(4) Journalists: Language is an integral part of conveying information through news media. This project seeks to engage journalists in understanding the importance how both their own and the rhetorical strategies of policy practitioners matter and how they may benefit from social sciences research into the (im)possibility of neutral communication. Impact will be achieved through knowledge-exchange and professional training provided for journalists at the Reuters Institute and the National Union of Journalists. Timescale: Years 2-3+
(5) Wider public: Given the enormous societal implications of security policy decisions, the project aims to maximise its outreach to contribute to expanding participation in the study and practice of security policy for the benefit of a wider range of stakeholders, including secondary school students, women, and the wider public. Impact will be achieved through events held at the University of Warwick, bringing IS to the classroom, active participation in existing widening participation networks, public lectures and utilizing web-centric dissemination channels. Timescale: Years 1-3+
(1) IS/IR Scholars: The project contributes to scholarship that challenges the mainstream understanding of security policy as unlike other areas of public policymaking, and as largely insulated from societal pressures and parochial interests. In particular through its in-depth empirical investigation of the role of policy language in security policy processes and practices, it will benefit scholars within traditional and critical IR/IS fields engaged in exposing the everyday complexity of security policy. Impact will be achieved through high-profile publications and vigorous knowledge-exchange activities in the international academic community. Timescale: Years 1-3
(2) Wider Academic Community: Through its multidisciplinary mixed-method research design to analysis discourse, the project benefits scholarship that seeks to both move discourse analysis beyond language-centrism and disintegrate existing methodological and disciplinary 'divides' in the social sciences in favour of problem-driven research. Project-impact will be achieved through fostering interdisciplinary knowledge-exchange activities at the University of Warwick, the UK, and beyond. Timescale: Years 1-3. Long-term impact will be achieved through enhancing my methodological skill set aimed at establishing my reputation as a facilitator of interdisciplinary research in IS as a pathway to increase the stakeholder relevance of social research. Timescale: Years 3+
(3) Policy Practitioners and Advisors: Security policy decisions have significant social and financial implications, and depictions of enmity lie at their core. Gaining knowledge of their agenda-setting and consensus-building effects to foster 'enemy addiction' is an important tool for political agents seeking to raise public awareness of the politics of threat construction, for example in debates over limiting the scope of security policy to open up new pathways for policy alternatives. The project will also benefit those engaged in collecting public opinion survey data and aim at limiting framing effects contained in security policy question. Impact will be achieved through yearly policy briefs, the knowledge-transfer activities of the project's Speaking International Security network, and creating knowledge transfer partnerships with US think tanks. I will undergo training in media relations to maximize the effectiveness of communicating project aims and results to end-users. Timescale: Years 1-3+
(4) Journalists: Language is an integral part of conveying information through news media. This project seeks to engage journalists in understanding the importance how both their own and the rhetorical strategies of policy practitioners matter and how they may benefit from social sciences research into the (im)possibility of neutral communication. Impact will be achieved through knowledge-exchange and professional training provided for journalists at the Reuters Institute and the National Union of Journalists. Timescale: Years 2-3+
(5) Wider public: Given the enormous societal implications of security policy decisions, the project aims to maximise its outreach to contribute to expanding participation in the study and practice of security policy for the benefit of a wider range of stakeholders, including secondary school students, women, and the wider public. Impact will be achieved through events held at the University of Warwick, bringing IS to the classroom, active participation in existing widening participation networks, public lectures and utilizing web-centric dissemination channels. Timescale: Years 1-3+
People |
ORCID iD |
| Alexandra Homolar (Principal Investigator) |
Publications
Broome A
(2018)
Bad science: International organizations and the indirect power of global benchmarking.
in European journal of international relations
Homolar A
(2019)
The power of Trump-speak: populist crisis narratives and ontological security
in Cambridge Review of International Affairs
Homolar A
(2021)
A call to arms: Hero-villain narratives in US security discourse
in Security Dialogue
HOMOLAR A
(2015)
Human security benchmarks: Governing human wellbeing at a distance
in Review of International Studies
Homolar A
(2021)
Populism and the Affective Politics of Humiliation Narratives
in Global Studies Quarterly
Homolar A
(2019)
Making sense of terrorism: a narrative approach to the study of violent events
in Critical Studies on Terrorism
Schnurr S
(2014)
LEGITIMIZING CLAIMS FOR 'CRISIS' LEADERSHIP IN GLOBAL GOVERNANCE The discourse of nuclear non-proliferation
in Critical Discourse Studies
Steele B
(2019)
Ontological insecurities and the politics of contemporary populism
in Cambridge Review of International Affairs
| Description | The main research focus of this project was to develop an innovative pathway to analyse the relationship between security rhetoric and security practice. Specifically, It zoomed in on the psycho-linguistic mechanisms that foster leanings toward nationalist strongmen, hawkish security policy approaches, and military solutions. After finalizing the novel conceptual framework to guide the data collection it became evident that the original interview-based methodology needed to change toward collecting archival materials. To gain in-depth understanding of how US policymakers 'speak' security, the Principal Investigator (PI) therefore undertook research in all 13 US presidential libraries (as one of very few researchers to ever do so) as well as in the US National Archives and the British Library London (for the latter's collection of US newspapers from 1645 onward). A significant finding from the project is that speechwriting for US security statements has over time become an increasingly a complex and highly political process, with varying degrees of presidential input and often involving the National Security Council as well as the Departments of State and Defense. Much of this remains hidden from the public. The recent dawn of an age of post-truth politics, where voting behaviour may be influenced significantly by emotionally charged language, underscores the importance of understanding the ways and processes through policymakers 'speak security'. The project also engaged in interdisciplinary research on speaking international security that broadened the empirical focus beyond the US. This included (1) analysing the dynamics of 'talking numbers' in international security, resulting in a sole-authored article on benchmarking human security and a co-authored article (with two political economists) on the 'bad science' underlying global benchmarks; (2) understanding international leadership in the context of the nuclear non-proliferation discourse, which has led to a co-authored article (with a political economist and two applied linguists); and (3) exploring the link between populism and security narratives, which has led to two co-authored journal articles (with an applied linguist and with a political scientist). The novel analytical routes developed in the project have lead to international collaborations. The most significant is the formation of a long-term research partnership with Brent J. Steel (University of Utah), a leading expert on the psychology-informed concept of Ontological Security. We recently co-organized two international workshops and several smaller events, attracting project-external additional funding in the region of £10.000, with two edited collections as forthcoming output. Beyond the research itself, the key aim of the ESRC Future Research Leaders scheme was to foster the award holder's professional development through training and increasing the researcher's profile. This has been achieved. I received specialist training in over 20 courses focused on mixed-method interdisciplinary skills and public engagement skills. I also presented my findings at over 20 International conferences and workshops and frequently acted as chair/discussant at these events. An indication of my rising profile is my increasing role as chair and discussant at international conferences and workshops as well as acting as external PhD examiner for the University of Glasgow and Royal Holloway (in addition to internally examining PhD projects), serving as external examiner for UG and MA modules and programmes at the University of Leeds, and mentoring postdoctoral students at the host institution is further evidence of my increased professional profile. |
| Exploitation Route | The project has created approximately 30.000 photos and photocopies of archival document pages. Because of classification and copyright issues the documents collected can currently only be accessed at the University of Warwick through a secure server. The PI is the first point of contact for this access. Over time, and in consultation with the US National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), selected document pages will be made available online to download from the project website. Findings will be available through the PIs publications. In addition, collaboration with schools initiated under the FRL grant will continue, in particular aiming at developing an online resource package on 'speaking international security in the classroom'. |
| Sectors | Education,Security and Diplomacy |
| Description | travel and subsistence grant to present at the 40th Anniversary BISA Conference in London, 16-19 June 2015. |
| Amount | £496 (GBP) |
| Funding ID | not applicable |
| Organisation | Review of International Studies |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 06/2015 |
| End | 06/2015 |
| Description | Trauma, Fear, and Belonging: The Everyday of Ontological Security in International Relations |
| Organisation | International Studies Association (ISA) |
| Country | United States |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | The project PI was a co-applicant, with Brent J. Steele (University of Utah) for a highly competitive ISA catalytic workshop grant (submitted 31 July 2016). This was approved, and the workshop - co-chaired and co-coordinated by the - was held at the ISA annual convention in Baltimore in February 2017. The workshop was on theme of 'Fear, Trauma, and Belonging: The Everyday of Ontological Security in International Relations', which builds upon a scoping workshop held at the University of Warwick in May 2016 that was co-funded by the PI's ESRC "Enemy Addiction" grant. The core aim of the workshop was for a geographically diverse team of researchers at the forefront of the field to move beyond the focus on state actors that has thus far been characteristic for how ontological security studies has manifested within International Relations. Specifically, it sought to increase the conceptual capture of how experiences of fear, trauma, and belonging impact upon foreign policy and international practices. |
| Collaborator Contribution | N/A. This was a joint application and the outputs will be co-edited. For details see above and below. |
| Impact | The publication output will be two edited collections, with co-authored introductions by the PI. The negotiations with publications outlets are currently in an advanced stage. For one of the edited collections, an agreement in principle has been obtained from the Cambridge Review of International Affairs. The collaboration is multidisciplinary with participants working, for example, on political psychology, area studies, security studies, and international relations. A public symposium to showcase findings to a broader audience is held at the University of Utah in April 2018. |
| Start Year | 2016 |
| Description | Secondary School Visit to Warwick University |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | Since the start of the grant i have been organizing annual visit to Warwick University by 14-19 Sixth Form students from a school north of Birmingham for a whole school day of 'university experience'. This entails a lecture tailored to complement their curriculum, usually on 'US Foreign Policy Traditions and US Interventions during the Cold War, which is followed by a lively discussion. The students also have Library Research Day, which includes a Library tour and an 'Introduction to Library Research' session held by Library representatives in a computer room as well as a couple of hours independent research throughout which I answer individual questions and give feedback. The event was a great success. The teachers reported that it had stimulated students' interest in social sciences, and we will repeat this type of event in January 2015 - hoping to continue the relationship in the future. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014,2015,2016 |
| URL | http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/research/researchcentres/csgr/sisaw/resources/ |
| Description | Secondary School Visit to Warwick University |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | Since the start of the grant i have been organizing annual visit to Warwick University by 14-19 Sixth Form history students from a school north of Birmingham for a whole school day of 'university experience'. This entails a lecture tailored to complement their curriculum, usually on 'US Foreign Policy Traditions and US Interventions during the Cold War, which is followed by a lively discussion. The students also have Library Research Day, which includes a Library tour and an 'Introduction to Library Research' session, usually held with support by Library representatives in a computer room as well as a couple of hours independent research throughout which I answer individual questions and give feedback. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | Secondary School Visit to Warwick University |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | Since the start of the grant i have been organizing annual visit to Warwick University by 14-19 Sixth Form history students from a school north of Birmingham for a whole school day of 'university experience'. This entails a lecture tailored to complement their curriculum, usually on 'US Foreign Policy Traditions and US Interventions during the Cold War, which is followed by a lively discussion. The students also have Library Research Day, which includes a Library tour and an 'Introduction to Library Research' session, usually held with support by Library representatives in a computer room as well as a couple of hours independent research throughout which I answer individual questions and give feedback. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | Secondary School Visit to Warwick University |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | Since the start of the grant i have been organizing annual visit to Warwick University by 14-19 Sixth Form history students from a school north of Birmingham for a whole school day of 'university experience'. This entails a lecture tailored to complement their curriculum, usually on US Foreign Policy but this year on research with archival materials, which is followed by a lively discussion. The students also have Library Research Day, which includes a Library tour and an 'Introduction to Library Research' session, usually held with support by Library representatives in a computer room as well as a couple of hours independent research throughout which I answer individual questions and give feedback. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |