K Grab Bag Final Paper MNDI 2010

8/11/2019 K Grab Bag Final Paper MNDI 2010

1/129

Kritiq Grab Bag MNDI CST 2010

Kritiq grab bagHow to Use this File ......................................................................................................................... 3First Negative Constructive ............................................................................................................. 4

SpecificsAfghanistan Link ............................................................................................................................. 8Afghanistan Stabilit link ............................................................................................................... !4Afghanistan " S#ecific $%#act ....................................................................................................... !&Afghanistan " 'urns Case .............................................................................................................. !(Afghanistan " Alternative Solves ................................................................................................... !8Afghanistan " )iscourse First ....................................................................................................... !*+iowea#ons Link ........................................................................................................................... ,-+ioterroris% Link ........................................................................................................................... ,!China Link ..................................................................................................................................... ,,China ngage%ent Link ................................................................................................................ ,4China " Alternative Solves ............................................................................................................. ,/China " )iscourse First ................................................................................................................. ,(China " A, 0ealis% 1oo2 ............................................................................................................. ,8

China " A, China is a 'hreat ......................................................................................................... ,*cono% Link ................................................................................................................................ 3-Fa%ine Link ................................................................................................................................... 3,Free 'ra2e Link ............................................................................................................................. 3&1lobal a##ing Link ..................................................................................................................... 3(1lobal ar Link ............................................................................................................................ 38Health Link .................................................................................................................................... 4!Hege%on Link ............................................................................................................................. 43$ran Link ........................................................................................................................................ 44$ranian Nuclearli5ation Link ......................................................................................................... 4&$ran " )iscourse First .................................................................................................................... 4($ra6 Link ........................................................................................................................................ 48

$ra6i 'erroris% Link ...................................................................................................................... /-i22le7ast ar Link .................................................................................................................... /!North orea Link ........................................................................................................................... /,North orea " 'urns Case ............................................................................................................. /4North orea 7 thics ...................................................................................................................... /&North orea " Alternative Solves Case .......................................................................................... /(9ver#o#ulation Link ...................................................................................................................... /*:overt Link ................................................................................................................................... &,:roliferation Link .......................................................................................................................... &4:roliferation Acci2ents Link .......................................................................................................... &(:roliferation :re2ictions Link ....................................................................................................... &*0ussia Link .................................................................................................................................... (-

Securit Link .................................................................................................................................. (!Securit $%#act 7 ;iolence ............................................................................................................. (/Securit " Alternative Solves ......................................................................................................... (&Securit " )iscourse First ............................................................................................................. (8Securit " 'hreats Constructe2 ..................................................................................................... (*Securit " A, :er% ....................................................................................................................... 8-'erroris% Link ............................................................................................................................... 8!'erroris% 7 Link ............................................................................................................................ 83'erroris% " )iscourse First .......................................................................................................... 84

[1]


2/129


Impact Stuff$%#act 7 ar .................................................................................................................................. 8/$%#act " Foucault ......................................................................................................................... 8*$%#act 7 Calculations < ;iolence ................................................................................................. *-$%#act " 1enoci2e ......................................................................................................................... *!$%#act " 9rientalis% < ;iolence .................................................................................................. *,

$%#act " 9theri5ation < ;iolence ................................................................................................. *3

Alternative StuffAlternative " =t Agonis% ............................................................................................................ *4Alternative " =t Criticis% 1oo2 .................................................................................................. */Alternative " Challenges :ower>nowle2ge ................................................................................. *8

2NC StuffFra%ework " )iscourse First ........................................................................................................ **Fra%ework " 0e#resentations First ............................................................................................ !-,Fra%ework " A, :olic7aking 1oo2 ........................................................................................ !-4Fra%ework " Fra%ing e .......................................................................................................... !-&

A, 0e%ove 'roo#s Link 'urn ...................................................................................................... !-(A, Nihilist .................................................................................................................................... !!-A, :er%utation ............................................................................................................................. !!!

Aff AnswersAff " Alternative )oesn?t Solve .................................................................................................... !!3Aff " Foucault +a2 ........................................................................................................................ !!4Aff " 'ruth 1oo2 .......................................................................................................................... !!/Aff " :rag%atis% 1oo2 ................................................................................................................ !!&Aff " A, North orea ................................................................................................................ !!(Aff " 0ealis% 1oo2 ...................................................................................................................... !!*Aff " 0ealis% $nevitable .............................................................................................................. !,-

Aff " A, )iscourse First ............................................................................................................... !,!Aff " A, 'hreats Constructe2 ...................................................................................................... !,,Aff " A, China .......................................................................................................................... !,3Aff " Action 1oo2 ........................................................................................................................ !,4Aff " No $%#act to +io#ower ....................................................................................................... !,/Aff " A, 9rientalis% .................................................................................................................... !,&Aff " :er% Solves ......................................................................................................................... !,(

[2]


3/129


4/129


"irst Negative Constructive#!eir imperative to protect certain populations an* t!e *eeming of ot!ers ase9pen*able necessitates 'illing in t!e name of securit%:ean #rof soc @ ac6uarie U Australia 2'1 itchellB States of $%agination e2s 'ho%asHansen an2 Finn Ste##utat. :# 4!7&4Sovereignt an2 +io#olitics in Nonliberal 0ule'here areB of courseB#lent of e=a%#les of the e=ercise of sovereignt in the twentieth centur thathave #ractice2 a 2eci2e2l nonliberal for% an2 #rogra% of national govern%ent both in relationto their own #o#ulations an2 those of other states. )oes this %ean that the for% of govern%ent of such states isasse%ble2 fro% ele%ents that are ra2icall 2ifferent fro% the ones we have 2iscusse2 hereD )oes this %ean that state socialis% an2National Socialis%B for e=a%#leB cannot be subEect to an analsis of the arts of govern%entD 'he answer to both these 6uestionsB $

believeB is no. 'he general argu%ent of this essa is that the e=ercise of govern%ent in all %o2ern states entailsthe articulation of a for% of #astoral #ower with one of sovereign #ower. Liberalis%B as we have Eust seenB%akes that articulation in a s#ecific wa. 9ther t#es of rule have a no less 2istinctive res#onse to theco%bination of ele%ents of a bio#olitics concerne2 with the 2etaile2 a2%inistration of life an2sovereign #ower that reserves the right of 2eath to itself. Consi2er again the contrastive ter%s in which it is#ossible to view bio#olitics an2 sovereignt. 'he final cha#ter in the first volu%e of the Histor o Se=ualit that contrasts sovereignt

an2 bio#olitics is title2 0ight of )eath an2 :ower over Life.G'he initial ter%s of the contrast between the tworegisters of govern%ent is thus between one that coul2 e%#lo #ower to #ut subEects to 2eathBeven if this right to kill was con2itione2 b the 2efense of the sovereignB an2 one that wasconcerne2 with the fostering of life. NeverthelessB each #art of the contrast can be further broken 2own.'he rightof 2eath can also be un2erstoo2 as the right to take life or let liveG the #ower over life as the#ower to foster life or 2isallow it.G Sovereign #ower is a #ower that 2istinguishes between#olitical life biosan2 %ere e=istence or bare life 5oe. +are life is inclu2e2 in the constitution of sovereign #owerb its ver e=clusion fro% #olitical life. $n contrastB bio#olitics %ight be thought to inclu2e 5oe in biosI stri##e2 2own %ere e=istence

beco%es a %atter of ticrli. 'husB the cont betweenbio#olitics an2 sovereignt is not one of a #ower of lifeversus a #ower of 2eath but concerns the wa the 2ifferent for%s of #ower treat %atters of lifean2 2eath an2 entail 2ifferent conce#tions of life. 'husB bio#olitics reinscribes the earlier rightof 2eath an2 #ower over life an2 #laces it within a new an2 2ifferent for% that atte%#ts toinclu2e what ha2 earlier been sacre2 an2 tabooB bare lifeB in #olitical e=istence. $t is no longer so%uch the right of the sovereign to #ut to 2eath his ene%ies but to *isqualif% t!e lifeJthe

%ere e=istenceJof t!ose w!o are a t!reat to t!e life of t!e populationB to 2isallow those2ee%e2 unworth of lifeBG those whose bare life is not worth living. 'his allows usB firstB toconsi2er what %ight be thought of as t!e *ar' si*e of biopolitics Foucault !*(*aI !3&J3(. $nFoucault?s accountBbio#olitics 2oes not #ut an en2 to the #ractice of warI it #rovi2es itwit! newan* more sop!isticate* 'illing mac!ines. 'hese %achines allow killing itself to bere#ose2 at the level of entire #o#ulations. ars beco%e genoci2al in the twentieth centur. 'hesa%e state that takes on the 2ut to enhance the life of the #o#ulation also e=ercises the #owerof 2eath over whole #o#ulations.Atomic weapons are t!e 'e% weapons of t!is processof t!e power to put w!ole populations to *eat!(e %ight also consi2er here the a#tlna%e2 biological an2 che%ical wea#ons that seek an e=ter%ination of #o#ulations b visiting#lagues u#on the% or #olluting the bios#here in which the live to the #oint at which bare life isno longer sustainable. Nor 2oes the birth of bio#olitics #ut an en2 to the killing of one?s own

#o#ulations. 0atherB it intensifies t!at 'illing;whether b an ethnic cleansingG that visitsholocausts u#on whole grou#s or b the %ass slaughters of classes an2 grou#s con2ucte2 in thena%e of the uto#ia to be achieve2.'here is a certain restraint in sovereign #ower. 'he right of 2eath is onl occsionall e=ercise2 asthe right to kill an2 then often in a ritual fashion that suggests a relation to the sacre2 oreoftenB sovereign #ower is %anifest in the refrainn fro% the right to kill. 'he bio#oliticali%#erative knows no such restraint.


5/129


"irst Negative Constructiveinti%ate connection between the e=ercise of a life7a2%inistering #ower an2 the co%%ission ofgenoci2eI $f genoci2e is in2ee2 the 2rea% of %o2ern #owersB this is not because of a recentreturn of the ancient right to killI it is because #ower is situate2 an2 e=ercise2 at the level of lifeBthe s#eciesB the raceB an2 the large7scale #heno%ena of #o#ulationG !*(*aI !3(. Foucault co%#letes thissa%e #assage with an e=#ression that 2eserves %ore notice/3massacres become vital(4'here is thus a kin2of #erverse ho%ogeneit between the #ower over life an2 the #ower to take life characteristic of

bio#ower. 'he e%ergence of a bio#olitical racis% in the nineteenth an2 twentieth centuries canbe a##roache2 as a traEector in which this ho%ogeneit alwas threatene2 to ti# over into a2rea2ful necessit. 'his racis% can be a##roache2 as a fun*amental mec!anism of powerthat is inscribe2 in the bio#olitical 2o%ain Stoler !**/I 84J8/. For FoucaultB the #ri%ar functionof this for% of racis% is to establish a 2ivision between those who %ust live an2 those who %ust2ieB an2 to 2istinguish the su#erior fro% the inferiorB the fit fro% the unfit. 'he notion an2 techni6ues of #o#ulation ha2 given riseB at the en2 of the nineteenth centurB to anew linkage a%ong #o#ulation the internal organi5ation of statesB an2 the co%#etition between states )arwinis%B as an i%#erial so cial an2 #olitical #rogra%B woul2 #lot theranking of in2ivi2ualsB #o#ulationsB an2 nations along the co%%on gra2ient of fitness an2 thus %easure efflcien6E.& HoweverB the series #o#ulationB evolutionB an2 raceG is notsi%#l a wa of thinking about the su#eriorit of the white racesG or of Eustifring colonialis%B but also of thinking about how to treat the 2egenerates an2 the abnor%als in one?s

own #o#ulation an2 #revent the further 2egeneration of the race.'he secon2 an2 %ost i%#ortant function for Foucault of this bio#olitical racis% in thenineteenth centur is that it establishes a #ositive relation between the right to kill an2 the

assurance of lifeG Stoler !**/I 84.'he life of the #o#ulationB its vigorB its healthB its ca#acities tosurviveB beco%es necessaril linke2 to the eli%ination of internal an2 e=ternal threats. 'his#ower to 2isallow life is #erha#s best enca#sulate2 in the inEunctions of the eugenic #roEect Ii2entifS? those who are 2egenerateB abnor%alB feeble7%in2e2B or of an inferior race an2 subEect the% to force2 sterili5ation

encourage those who are su#eriorB fitB an2 intelligent to #ro#agate.$2entif those whose life is but %ere e=istencean2 2is6ualif their #ro#agation encourage those who can #artake of a sovereign e=istence an2of %oral an2 #olitical life. +ut this last e=a%#le 2oes not necessaril establish a #ositive Eustification for the right to killB onl the right to 2isallow life.$f we are to begin to un2erstan2 the t#e of racis% engage2 in b Na5is%B howeverB we nee2 to take into account another kin2 of 2enoue%ent between the bio#olitical%anage%ent of #o#ulation an2 the e=ercise of sovereignt. 'his version of sovereignt is no longer the transfor%e2 an2 2e%ocrati5e2 for% foun2e2 on the libert of the

Euri2ical subEectB as it is for liberalis%B but a sovereignt that takes u# an2 transfor%s a further ele%ent of sovereigntB its s%bolics of bloo2G Foucault !*(*aI !48. For

FoucaultBsovereignt% is groun*e* in bloo*Jas a realit an2 as a s%bolJEust as one %ight sa that se=ualitbeco%es the ke fiel2 on which bio#olitical %anage%ent of #o#ulations is articulate2.hen #ower is e=ercise2 throughre#ression an2 2e2uctionB through a law over which hangs the swor2B when it is e=ercise2 on thescaffol2 b the torturer an2 the e=ecutionerB an2 when relations between househol2s an2

fa%ilies were forge2 through allianceB bloo2 was a realit with a s%bolic functionG + contrastB forbio#olitics with its the%es of healthB vigorB fitnessB vitalitB #rogenB survivalB an2 raceB #ower s#oke ose=ua!it an2 to se=ualitGFoucault !*(*aI !4(.For Foucault !*(*aI !4*J/-B the novelt of National Socialis% was the wa it articulate2 the oneiric e=altation of bloo2BG offatherlan2B an2 of the triu%#h of the race in an i%%ensel cnical an2 naKve fashionB with the #aro=s%s of a 2isci#linar an2bio#olitical #ower concerne2 with the 2etaile2 a2%inistration of the life of the #o#ulation an2 the regulation of se=ualitB fa%ilB%arriageB an2 e2ucation. Na5is% generali5e2 bio#ower without the li%it7criti6ue #ose2 b the Euri2ical subEect of rightB but it coul2not 2o awa with sovereignt. $nstea2B it establishe2 a set of #er%anent interventions into the con2uct of the in2ivi2ual within the#o#ulation an2 articulate2 this with the %thical concern for bloo2 an2 the triu%#h of the race.G 'husB the she#her27flock ga%ean2 the cit7citi5en ga%e are trans%ute2 into the eugenic or2ering of biological e=istence of %ere living an2 subsistence an2

articulate2 on the the%es of the #urit of bloo2 an2 the %th of the fatherlan2. $n such an articulation of theseele%ents of sovereign an2 bio#olitical for%s of #owerB the relation between the a2%inistrationof life an2 the right to kill entire #o#ulations is no longer si%#l one of a 2rea2ful ho%ogeneit.$t has beco%e a necessar relation. 'he a2%inistration of life co%es to re6uire a bloo2bath. $t isnot si%#l that #owerB an2 therefore warB will be e=ercise2 at the level of an entire #o#ulation. $tis that the act of 2is6ualifing the right to life of other races beco%es necessar for the fosteringof the life of the race. oreoverB the eli%ination of other races is onl one face of the #urificationof one?s own race Foucault ig(bI ,3!.'he other #art is to e=#ose the latter to a universal an2absolute 2angerB to e=#ose it to the risk of 2eath an2 total 2estruction. For FoucaultB with the Na5i statewe have an absolutel racist stateB an absolutel %ur2erous state an2 an absolutel suici2al stateG ,3,B all of which aresu#eri%#ose2 an2 converge on the Final Solution. ith the Final SolutionB the state tries to eli%inateB through the MewsB all theother racesB for who% the Mews were the s%bol an2 the %anifestation. 'his inclu2esB in one of Hitler?s last actsB the or2er to 2estrothe bases of bare life for the 1er%an #eo#le itself. Final Solution for other racesB the absolute suici2e of the 1er%an raceG is

inscribe2B accor2ing to FoucaultB in the functioning of the %o2ern state ,3,.

[>]


6/129


"irst Negative Constructive#!e alternative is to embrace sub)ective agonism( #!is allows us to unmas' violentpower relations an* creates space for resistanceS!in'o;isiting Assistant :rofessor of $nternational 0elations at +ucknell Universit 2'?0ose%arB Agonistic :eaceI A :ost%o2ern 0ea2ingG ,--8 3& 4(3 illenniu% 7 Mournal of$nternational Stu2iesAccor2ing to Foucaultagonis% refers to a #olitical relationshi# which o#ens u# a site fro% withinwhich relations of #ower can be resiste2 an2 altere2./* $n this agonistic s#ace in2ivi2ualsencounter one another an2 carve out the #ara%eters of their ethical interactions. Foucaulti2entifies the un%asking of #olitical violence as the real political tas' in a societ% becauseit is onl b %aking the o#eration of #ower visible that we can then strategise how to fightagainst it. 'hus we engage in #ower struggles in or2er to alter #ower relations.&- hat we seek to alterare those #rocesses of govern%ental in2ivi2ualisation which se#arates the in2ivi2ualB breaks his links with othersB s#lits u#co%%unit lifeB forces the in2ivi2ual back on hi%selfB an2 ties hi% to his own i2entit in a constraining wa?.&!

Agonis% functions as the critical terrain locate2 between the inter#la of #ower an2 free2o%where the recalcitrance of the will an2 the intransigence of free2o%? e%erge as constant#rovocations.&, Agonis% involves a relationshi# that is at the sa%e ti%e %utual incite%ent an2struggle?B however such a struggle is inten2e2 to re%ain o#en an2 serve as a t#e of #er%anent

#rovocation rather than 2evolving into a #aralsing confrontation.&3 Foucault s#ecificallreEects the i2ea of an essential antagonis%B but he 2oes in2icate that there is an essential obstinac affiliate2 withthe e=ercise of free2o%. 'hus our relations with one another are not characterise2 b a #ri%or2ial essence that woul2 2eter%ine ourrelations to be fun2a%entall antagonisticB but #rinci#les of free2o% on the other han2B 2o in2icate #oints of insubor2ination an2struggle.

An agonistic stance e%erges in res#onse to a #olitical 2eter%ination that an intolerabilit hasbeen i2entifie2B which accor2ing to FoucaultB threatens to break our connections whether #ersonal orco%%unalwith one anotherB isolate usB an2>or atte%#t to bin2 us to an i2entit which li%its an2 constrains us.Agonis%is a #articular t#e of resistant res#onse that seeks to change the #olitical 2na%ic that woul2usher in an2 or sustain such isolating an2 constraining effects. Agonistic engage%ents arecharacterise2 b the search for 2ifficult truthswhere %oralit itself is at stakeB because within the ter%s of anagonistic encounter the rights of each #erson are in so%e sense i%%anent in the 2iscussion Oe%#hasis a22e2P?.&4

'he 6uestion is in what sense are the rights of each i%%anent an2 what is the content of such rightsD Accor2ing to Foucaultthe#erson asking 6uestions has a right to not be #ersua2e2B to re6uest further infor%ationB to #ointout contra2ictions an2 fault reasoning an2 to stress other #ostulates. hile on the other han2B theres#on2ent also e=ercises a right that 2oes not go beon2 the 2iscussion itself?.&/ His acce#tance of the 2ialogue is what ties hi% tothe 6uestioner an2 the logic of his argu%ents bin2s hi% to his earlier state%ents. +oth interlocutors are careful to 2e#lo onl therights that are given b each to each within the ter%s of the 2ialogue.&&

+ut what is intriguing is how Foucault 2escribes the content of a #ower relationshi# becauseulti%atel agonis% involves #ower struggles which 2raw attention to sites of resistance an2create spaces of in*ivi*ual free*om. SubEectivit is ke to the ter%s of a #owerrelationshi# because it can onl be a #ower relationshi# if the other? is recogni5e2 an2%aintaine2 to the ver en2 as a subEect who acts an2 Ofor who%P a whole fiel2 of res#onsesBreactionsB resultsB an2 #ossible interventions %a o#en u#.?&( Foucault s#ecifies that a #ower relationshi#re6uires the recognition of the other as a subEect an2 that the establishing of #ower relations 2oes not e=clu2e the use of violencean %ore than it 2oes the obtaining of consent?.&8 +ut this choice between consent or violence is not constitutiveof the basic natureof #ower relations. NoB the e=ercise of #ower is a set of actions on #ossible actions it incitesB it in2ucesB it se2ucesB it %akes easier or%ore 2ifficult it releases or contrivesB %akes %ore #robable or less in the e=tre%eB it constrains or forbi2s absolutelB but it is

alwas a wa of acting u#on one or %ore acting subEects b virtue of their acting or being ca#able of action. A set of actions u#onother actions.?&*Foucault s#ecifies two 2ifferent was in which the ter% subEect? can be 2efine2. 9ne entails the i2ea of being subEect to so%eoneelse b control an2 2e#en2ence Owhile the other refers to a subEect as one who isP tie2 to his own i2entit b a conscience or self7knowle2ge?.(- SubEectivit enco%#asses those struggles for recognition of one?s uni6ueness or in2ivi2ualit which e%erge fro%

within the ter%s of #ower relationshi#s.'he Foucaul2ian subEect e%erges in res#onse to all of those forcesthat align to #ro2uce subEecthoo2 whether it be in accor2ance with the econo%ic or i2eologicalnee2s of the state or so%e scientific or a2%inistrative #attern of obEectifie2 knowle2ge. AsFoucault reiteratesB the 6uestion is one of 2eter%ining what the subEect %ust beB what con2ition is

[@]


7/129


"irst Negative Constructivei%#ose2 on itB what status it is to haveB an2 what #osition it is to occu# in realit or in the i%aginarB in or2er to beco%e thelegiti%ate subEect of one t#e of knowle2ge or another.?(!

Agonis% is the set #oint of a #er%anent #rovocationB a struggle where subEects face a fiel2 of#ossibilities in which several kin2s of con2uctB several was of reacting an2 %o2es of behaviorare available?.(, +ut agonis% itself unfol2s within a larger #olitical 2na%ic that infor%s the

ver ter%s of its encounter an2 et at the sa%e ti%e it is this #olitical structuration that agonis%un2ertakes to 2isru#t an2 2is#lace. 'his larger 2na%ic is often referre2 to as Foucault?s theorof war. $n a brilliant et troubling stroke of reversal Foucault 2eclaresI+ut it %ust not be forgotten that #olitics? has been conceive2 as a continuationB if not e=actlan2 2irectl of warB at least of the %ilitar %o2el as a fun2a%ental %eans of #reventing civil 2isor2er. :oliticsB as atechni6ue of internal #eace an2 or2erB sought to i%#le%ent the %echanis% of the #erfect ar%Bof the 2isci#line2 %assB of the 2ocile useful troo#B of the regi%ent in ca%# an2 in the fiel2B on%anoeuvres an2 on e=ercises.(3

An2 as Mabri notesB war for Foucault in2icates a technolog of control an2 #acification while hisuse of the ter% itself is inten2e2 to blur the boun2ar between war an2 #eaceB the battlefiel2Ban2 social s#here?.(4 ithin this single stroke relations of #ower are reconce#tualise2 asintersecting relations of force? an2 the onl wa to 2eco2e these relations is b rea2ing the%

through the %eta#horical lens of warfare.(/'his Foucaul2ian shift in #ers#ective 2raws our attention to the was in which social2o%inationB 2ifferentiationB an2 hierarchisation all ultimatel% *erive from war. $t lea2s usto regar2 war as the cataltic %eton% for the eru#tion of antagonis%sB confrontations an2struggles within societ. $t focuses attention on the 2e#lo%ent of ter%s like tactics? an2strategies? as an invaluable wa to analse relations of #ower. An2 it serves to highlight how#olitical institutions are infuse2 with #roce2ures an2 o#erations akin to those of the %ilitaran2 its war7%aking functions. +ut #erha#s the %ost Earring of insights is Foucault?s refra%ing of#eace itselfB becauseB accor2ing to FoucaultB an uninterru#te2 co%bat worksG travaille #eaceBan2 Q civil or2er is fun2a%entall a battle7or2er?.(& He goes on to 2escribe how war infiltratescivil institutionsB laws an2 its ver structure of or2er an2 that war rages within the %echanis%sof #ower which constitute the entire social bo2. ar seethes at the core of or2er an2 thus it isthe ke which cracks the co2e of #eace?.((HoweverB as :as6uino in2icatesB the state of war insi2e the co%%onwealth is not that of a 2irect confrontation of forces " %arke2

b bloo2B battlesB an2 cor#ses " but rather a certain state of re#resentationsB which are #lae2 off against each other?.(8:eaceB orwhat is referre2 to as #eaceB is rent with subor2inationB re#ressionB an2 2o%inationB where thestronger %arshal all of their force to institutionaliseB legiti%ateB an2 instantiate a sste% ofor2er that will %aintain their strategic #osition of #rivilege. ar takes u# resi2ence right in theheart of the co%%onwealth an2 #eace serves as its acco%#liceB war?s silentB cal% an2i%#erturbable faa2e.(* +ut agonis%B ar%e2 with its own cache of battle7worn %eta#hors ofco%bat an2 struggleB #ositions itself at the war>#eace ne=us.

[]


8/129


Afg!anistan Bin'#!e affirmative pe)orati0es t!e Afg!ani i*entit% + position it as bac'war*s an* innee* of fi9ing creates a !ierarc!% of values t!at *enigrates all t!ose w!o are not int!e est + t!is is t!e root cause of S interventionCrowe 2' L.A. 'he Fu55 )rea%GI )iscourseB Historical %thsB an2 ilitari5e2inSecurit 7$nterrogating 2angerous %ths of Afghanistan an2 the est?Rhtt#I>>archive.sgir.eu>u#loa2s>Crowe7loricrowe.#2fSeveral #roble%atic ele%ents re#eate2l a##ear in estern narratives that are e%be22e2

within both of these categori5ations of 2iscourse. 'hese ele%ants have beco%e nor%ali5e2 an2banal in the %e2ia resulting in the au2ience %th rea2ers?(-beco%ing 2e7sensiti5e2 to the2angerous i2eological an2 i%#erial agen2as the e%#ower. $n recogni5ing how these ele%ents

which are intricatel connecte2 to each other 7 beco%e %obili5e2 an2 i2entifing theassu%#tionsB 2istortionsB an2 social hierarchies that are their foun2ationB the 2iscursive #owerof %ths that legiti%i5e violence an2 i%#erial #olitics in the na%e of securit begins to bereveale2 the %ths the%selves unravelle2. 'he first ele%ent is that of binaris%s or 2ualis%sI'he 2ichoto%ies of astG an2 estGB goo2G an2 evilGB civilisationG the est an2barbaris%G $sla%ic countries(!B for the warG an2 against the warGB #rogressG an2backwar2nessGB #eaceG an2 warGB #reG an2 #ostG conflictB an2 nor%alG an2 abnor%alG has

#ro2uce2 false 2ichoto%ies that #osition histor an2 #olic 2ecisions in si%#listic black or whiteter%s an2 co%#art%entalise actors into goo2 versus ba2. Consi2er for e=a%#le the u#surge since *>!! of goo2vs. evilG an2 with us or against usG rhetoric. 'he 2anger of such 2ualistic %o2es of thought is in its #olari5ation of the worl2 with2istinct boun2aries an2 bor2ers. A22itionallB such 2iscourseB e=#lain 'uathail an2 AgnewB freel fuses fact with fiction an2 realitwith the i%aginar to #ro2uce a reasoning where neither is 2istinguishavle fro% the otherG.(, $n a recent talk on Cana2ian Foreign:olic in AfghanistanB alter )orn of the Cana2ian forces collegeB 0C recogni5e2 these #roble%atic binaries as #art of a #olic ofe=tre%is% that works to create e=#licit ene%ies an2 allies while ren2ering the abilit to see hu%anit in each other as i%#ossible.'his is a strateg of %aintaining #owerB he e=#laine2B that instea2 creates a self7fulfilling #ro#hec b #olari5ing %ore #eo#le an2creating %ore ene%iesB not onl in foreign? regions but also within the est.(3 ven bin La2enB in his #re7recor2e2 %essage thatwas broa2cast on the first night of the war launche2 b the US with a %assive bo%bing assault on 9ctober (thB e%#loe2#rovocative 2ualis%sI $ tell ou that these events have s#lit the entire worl2 into two ca%#sI one of faithB with no h#ocritesB an2

one of unbelief " %a 1o2 #rotect us fro% itG.(4'he #er#etuation of these binaries is 2ee#l #roble%aticinsofar as the are the foun2ations of the 2iscursive fiel2 u#on which hierarchies of i2entit an22ifference that 2eter%ine the nature of relations between states is constructe2. hat this %eans

is that the sovereign state an2 its? foreign #olic obEectives constitutewhat )avi2 Ca%#bell calls

a%oral s#ace of i2entitG(/. $n his re7theori5ation of foreign #olicB Ca%#bell e=#oses theessential role binaries #la in the #rocesses i%#licate2 in state i2entit for%ationI $t e%#hasi5esthe e=clusionar #racticesB the 2iscourses of 2angerB the re#resentations of fearB an2 theenu%eration of threatsB an2 2own#las the role of affir%ative 2iscourses such as clai%s toshare2 ethnicitB nationalitB #olitical i2ealsB religious beliefsB or other co%%onalities.(&Looking s#ecificall at the relationshi# between the US an2 AfghanistanB the US has 2efine2 itsown i2entit as goo2B %o2ernB nor%alB etc. inrelation to its 2ifference fro% the Afghan 9ther?Bcultivating its 2e%oni5ation on the basis of #erceive2 2anger an2 %oral valuationssu#erior>inferior that are s#atiall constructe2. Clai%s that the est is constructing a#eacefulB 2e%ocraticB an2 liberal nation values clai%e2 to be at the core of our civili5ationB free2o%B 2e%ocrac an2was of lifeG are %otivate2 b the nee2 to transfor% their barbaris%B inhu%anitB low %oralitan2 stle of lifeG.(( isenstein e=#lains that 9thers? are constructe2 or fabricate2 in or2er to2eal with the fear of not7knowingI Creating the savageB or slaveB or wo%anB or Arab allows%a2e7u# certaint rather than honest co%#le= variabilit an2 unknowabilit.G(8 UnfortunatelB this isnot a novel #heno%enon uni6ue to the conte%#orar situation in AfghanistanI articulations of securit that rel on2efinitions of otherness? as threats to securitB argues Ca%#bellBre#licates the logic of Christen2o%?s evengelis%of fear?. 9bstructions to securit>or2er>1o2 beco%e 2efine2 as irrationalB abnor%alB %a2B etc.in nee2 of rationali5ationB nor%ali5ationsB #unish%entB %orali5ationB etc.I 'he state #roEect ofsecurit re#licates the church #roEect of salvationG.(* As is co%%onl knownB un2er Christen2o% it was such2iscourses of 2anger? that were instru%ental in establishing its own authorit an2 2isci#lining its followers. Si%ilarlB b reling on2iscourses of 2anger to 2efine who weG areB who weG are notB an2 who theG are that we %ust fearB the state constructs ene%ies

[?]
http://archive.sgir.eu/uploads/Crowe-loricrowe.pdfhttp://archive.sgir.eu/uploads/Crowe-loricrowe.pdf


9/129


Afg!anistan Bin'who?s eli%ination>2o%ination is necessar to #reserve the states own i2entit an2 securitI All #owers are geare2 against a single

alien.GAn2 all the rationali5ations are raging against the a2vent of vil.G8- 'husB the war onterrorGB or AfghanistanB or $ra6B beco%esB in the wor2s of +au2rillar2B an en2less war of#revention to e=corciseG evilG an ablation of a non7e=istant ene% %as6uara2ing as theleit%otiv for universal safet.8!

[D]


10/129


Afg!anistan Bin':iscourse on Afg!anistan presumes t!at t!e S must ta'e action to s!ape

Afg!anistan into an i*eal space + t!is presumes a certain norm t!at Afg!anistanmust conform to, creating a !ierarc!% of 'nowle*ge an* t!oug!t t!at *epicts

Afg!anistan as incapable of constructing itselfCrowe 2' L.A. 'he Fu55 )rea%GI )iscourseB Historical %thsB an2 ilitari5e2inSecurit 7$nterrogating 2angerous %ths of Afghanistan an2 the est?Rhtt#I>>archive.sgir.eu>u#loa2s>Crowe7loricrowe.#2f'hese ele%ents of o##ositional binaries is closel relate2 to the secon2 ele%entI conte%#orar 2iscourse has2evelo#e2 fro% an2 further #er#etuates a #articular i2eolog that e%%anates fro% a neo7liberalca#italist an2 i%#erial agen2a that is foun2e2 u#on neo7colonialist attitu2es an2 assu%#tions.'he US ca%#aign to fight terroris%?B initiate2 after Se#te%ber !!thG e=#lains Nahla Ab2o has crstalli5e2 allthe i2eological un2er#innings of colonial an2 i%#erial #olicies towar2s the constructe2other?.G8,'his e%erges in the herois%G %th %entione2 above for e=a%#leB )ebri= e=#lains how narrativesaroun2 hu%anitarianis% serve an i2eological #ur#ose in that it contributes to thereinforce%ent of neoliberal #olicies in #athological? regions of the international lan2sca#e.83$talso e%erges in the %ilitari5ation %thB insofar as neoliberal globalisation relies on theinstitutionali5ation of neo7colonialis% an2 the co%%o2ification an2 recoloni5ation of labor

via %ilitari5e2 strategies of i%#erial #olitics.'hat isB as Agathangelou an2 Ling #oint outB Neoliberal econo%icsenables globali5e2 %ilitari5ationG.84 %be22e2 in this nor%ali5ation of neo7colonial fra%es are the ele%ents of linearit an2 thusassu%e2 rationalit of reasoning in the est. As Cana2a ste##e2 u# its role in 2irect co%bat o#erations which inclu2e2 an increaseof co%bat troo#sB fighter EetsB an2 tanks with long7range firing ca#acities8/B Ste#hen Har#er a##eale2 to troo# %orale on thegroun2 in AfghanistanB statingI Cana2a an2 the international co%%unit are 2eter%ine2 to take a faile2 state an2 create a

R2e%ocraticB #ros#erous an2 %o2ern countr.R8& % italics :ro#ose2 solutions to the conflicts inAfghanistan have been fra%e2 an2 Eustifie2 not onl as saving backwar2s Afghanistan? but alsoas generousl bringing it into the %o2ernB ca#italistB neoliberal age. oreoverB this ele%entre#resents an continuit of colonial #owerB #resenting the one correct truth or resolutionBe%%anating fro% the obEective ga5e? of the #roble%7solving? estern worl2. 0e#resentationsof Afghanistan #resent estern voices as the authorit an2 the #otential #rogress such authoritcan bring to the ast? as naturall 2esirable. 'his rationalit? also #resu%es an inherent value of

estern %etho2olog inclu2ing statistical analsisB 6uantification of 2ataB etcan2 2evalues alternative

e#iste%ologies inclu2ing those of the Afghan #eo#le. 'his is #roble%atic for several reasonsI ! $tforecloses an2 2iscourages thinking outsi2e the bo=G an2 instea2 relies u#on the %aster?stoolsG which inclu2e violent %ilitar forceB the installation of a 2e%ocratic regi%eB#eacekee#ingB an2 reconstruction an2 foreign ai2 " alternative strategies are 2ee%e2 ra2icalGB unworkableGB an2anti7A%ericanG , it #rioriti5es nu%bers an2 statitistics over live2 e=#eriences. + reling on talliesof 2eathsB #ercetages of votersB an2 nu%bers of insurgents for e=a%#leB the e=#eriences of thoseliving in the region are obfuscate2 an2 2evalue2B an2 3it re#ro2uces a colonial hierarch ofknowle2ge #ro2uction. 9l2 colonial narratives of have re7surface2 with renewe2 vigor in thecase of Afghanistan is contingent on an2 %utuall reinforce2 b o##osing narratives of acivili5e2? an2 2evelo#e2? est?. For e=a%#leI Consi2er the language which is being use2QCallingthe #er#etrators evil2oersB irrationalB calling the% the forces of 2arknessB uncivili5e2B intent on2estroing civili5ationB intent on 2estroing 2e%ocrac. 'he hate free2o%B we are tol2.ver

#erson of colourB an2 $ woul2 want to sa also ever Aboriginal #ersonB will recogni5e that language.'he language of usversus the%B of civili5ation versus the forces of 2arknessB this language is roote2 in the coloniallegac.G8( 'his coloni5er>coloni5e2 2ichoto% is ke to the civilisational Eustification the USa2%inistration #ursues e wage war to save civili5ation itselfG88 whichBas Agathangelou an2 Linge=#lainB is %otivate2 b a constructe2 %e2ieval evil that threatens A%erican free2o% an22e%ocracB the a#otheosis of %o2ern civili5ationB an2 therefore %ust be 2isci#line2>civili5e2.$nhis S#eech to Congress on Se#te%ber ,!B ,--!B +ush #ortras the irrational 9ther as vil an2 retributive seeking to 2estro the2evelo#e2B secure? #ros#erous? an2 civili5e2? free worl2I 'hese terrorists kill not %erel to en2 livesB but to 2isru#t an2 en2 a waof lifeQAl Tae2a is to terror what the %afia is to cri%e. +ut its goal is not %aking %one its goal is re%aking the worl2B an2

i%#osing its ra2ical beliefs on #eo#le everwhere.G8*'his #ro2uction of othering an2 re7institutionali5ation of

[1E]


11/129


Afg!anistan Bin'colonial 2iscourse has been enable2 b an2 facilitate2 culture clash? e=#lanations.*- 'he 2angerof such theoriesBwarns 0a5ackB lies not onl in their 2econte=tuali5ation an2 2ehistorici5ationB butalso on its reliance on the nlighten%ent narrative an2 notions of uro#ean %oral su#erioritthat Eustif the use of force. 'his is evi2ent in the un#roble%atic wa in which outsi2e forceshave assu%e2 a right of interference in the region s#anning fro% the !8th centur when i%#erial #owers 2e%arcate2the )urran2 Line which create2 a bor2er between +ritish $n2ia an2 Afghanistan with the goal of %aking Afghanistan an effectivebuffer state?for +ritish $%#erial interests*! to the A%erican intervention that began in the Col2 arB followe2 b the Soviets in the

!*8-?s an2 the A%ericansB Cana2ians an2 +ritish to2a. $n factB 'he est?s #ractical engage%ent in Afghanistanreveals how it has serve2 to re#oro2uce this neo7colonial %th as well as the co%#le=ities an2#ara2o=es which si%ultaneousl 2e7stabili5e that %th.)uring the col2 warB the Soviet an2 the A%ericans use2Afghanistan as the battlegroun2 for #owerB choosing to s#onsor an2 con2e%n various regi%es as the saw fit this histor of foreignengage%ent contribute2 to state frag%entationB un2er2evelo#%entB an2 the self7sustaining war7econo% that #ersist to2a. Ane=a%#le of this is the use of rentier inco%es 2uring the earl !*--?s that were use2 as a %eans of control an2 coercion.*,

[11]


12/129


Afg!anistan Bin'#!e belief t!at we must e9it Iraq to leave it b% itself constructs Afg!anistan as anempt% space t!at must be protecte* from t!e outsi*e + t!is re*uces Afg!anistan to

)ust a buffer 0one on t!e global c!ess boar*Herol* assoc #rof econ 2evelo#%ent an2 wo%ens stu2ies@ new Ha%#shire 2'@ arcBAfghanistan as an e%#t s#ace #art oneG htt#I>>cursor.org>stories>e%#ts#ace.ht%lFour ears after the U.S.7le2 attack on AfghanistanBthe true %eaning of the U.S occu#ation is revealingitself. Afghanistan re#resents %erel a s#ace that is to be 'ept empt%. estern #owers haveno interest in either buing fro% or selling to the blighte2 nation. 'he i%#overishe2 Afghancivilian #o#ulation is as irrelevant as is the nations econo%ic 2evelo#%ent. +ut the s#acere#resente2 b Afghanistan in a volatile region of geo7#olitical i%#ortB is to be ke#t vacant fro%all hostile forces. 'he countr is situate2 at the center of a resurgent $sla%ic worl2B close to arising China an2 $n2iaan2 the restive e=7Soviet Asian re#ublicsB an2 a2Eacent to oil7rich states.'he onl #o#ulate2 centers of an real concern are a few islan2s of grotes6ue ca#italist i%aginar realit 77 fore%ost abul 77 nee2e2to#roEect the i%age of an e=isting central govern%entB an i%age further #ro%ote2 b ar5ais fre6uent international Eunkets. $n suchislan2s of affluence a%i2st a sea of #overtB a sufficient 2ensit of foreign e=7#atsB a bloate2 N197co%%unitB car#etbaggers an2hangers7on of all stri#esB %one 2isbursersB neo7colonial a2%inistratorsB o##ortunistsB bribe2 local #ower brokersB facilitatorsBbeauticians of the cit #lanner or aesthetician t#esB %e%bers of the 2evelo#%ent establish%entB 2o7goo2ersB enforcersB etc.Bwarrants the #resence of estern businesses. 'hese inclu2e foreign bank branchesB lu=ur hotels Serena abulB Hatt 0egenc ofabulB sho##ing %alls the 0oshan :la5aB the abul Cit Centre %allB i%#ort houses 'oota selling its #o#ular Lan2 CruiserB

i%age %akers M. alter 'ho%#sonB an2 the ubi6uitous Coca7Cola!.

'he RotherBR the real econo% 77 is a vast infor%al one in which the Afghan %asses creativel ekeout a 2ail e=istence., 'he are utterl irrelevant to the neo7colonist intereste2 in running ane%#t s#ace at the least cost. 'he self7financing o#iu% econo% re2uces such cost an2 thrivesu#on invisibilit. 'he invisible %ultitu2es re#resent a nuisance 77 %uch like abuls traffic 77 u#on%aintaining the e%#t s#ace. 9nl the %ini%al a%ount of resources 77 whether of the carrot orstick t#e 77 will be 2evote2 to #reserving their invisibilit. an of those who returne2 after theoverthrow of the 'aliban are now seeking to e%igrate abroa2B further e%#ting the s#ace.3'he %eans to %aintain an2 #olice such an e%#t s#ace are a #articular s#atial 2istribution of%ilitar #roEection b U.S. an2 increasingl NA'9 forcesI twent7four hour high7level aerialsurveillance a three7level aerial #resence lowB %e2iu%B high altitu2e #re7#ositione2 fast7reactionB heavil7ar%e2groun2 forces base2 at heavil fortifie2 ke no2al #oints an2 the e%#lo of local satra#s e=#en2able forces. 'he ai% of

running the e%#t s#ace at least cost is foun2ering u#on a resurgent 'alibanB who have2evelo#e2 their own least cost insurgenc wea#ons e.g.B i%#rovise2 e=#losive 2evices an2suici2e bo%bings an2 are #utting the% to goo2 use.

[12]
http://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.htmlhttp://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.html#1http://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.html#2http://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.html#3http://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.htmlhttp://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.html#1http://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.html#2http://cursor.org/stories/emptyspace.html#3


13/129


Afg!anistan Bin'#!e affirmatives construction of t!e est as t!e Saviour of Afg!anistan is violentCrowe 2' L.A. 'he Fu55 )rea%GI )iscourseB Historical %thsB an2 ilitari5e2inSecurit 7$nterrogating 2angerous %ths of Afghanistan an2 the est?Rhtt#I>>archive.sgir.eu>u#loa2s>Crowe7loricrowe.#2f'he herois%? narrative can be calle2 b several na%esI the saviour sn2ro%e?B %e2iaticallgenerate2G or hbri2 techno7%e2icalG hu%anitarianis%/8B foreign ai2GB hu%anitarianinterventionGB etc. 'his narrative constructs foreign engage%ent in a region as s#ectacle an2 as#ri5e2 co%%o2ities to be a2%ire2 an2 sol2? to the #ublic it constructs the est as saviours?an2 the 9ther?B in this case AfghanistanB as the victi% in nee2 of savingB acco%#lishe2 throughi%ages an2 tales of #assion an2 fervour that often #athologi5e the other an2 valori5e the

estern interveener. hen the USB with the su##ort of the UNB bo%be2 Afghanistan in ,--! inres#onse to the events of Se#te%ber !!thB the %ission was entitle2 9#eration n2uringFree2o%G. 'o2aB as reconstruction an2 #eace7buil2ing? efforts are un2erwa in Afghanistan intan2e% with %ilitar o#erationsB #olitical conversations an2 %e2ia #ro2uctions are saturate2

with calls to win the hearts an2 %in2sG of the #eo#le of Afghanistan an2 of the necessar an2benevolent role the est %ust #la in instilling free2o%?B Eustice? an2 2e%ocrac? in the war7torn an2 #overt stricken region. )ebri=B offers an analsis of what he calls the global

hu%anitarian s#ectacleG to 2e%onstrate how %e2ical an2 hu%anitarian N19?s si%ulateherois%B senti%entB an2 co%#assionG %e2ical catastro#hes an2 civil conflictsB he e=#lainsBhave in2ee2 beco%e #ri5e2 co%%o2ities for globali5ing neoliberal #olicies of estern states an2international organi5ations to sell to %th rea2ers?I 'he give estern states an2 the UN theo##ortunit to #ut their liberal hu%anistic #olicies into #racticeB whileB for estern %e2iaBhu%anitarianis% si%#l sellsG./* 'here are several re#ercusions of this %thB e=#lains )ebri=.FirstB this has resulte2 in real hu%anitarian an2 %oral issues being overlooke2 Secon2B i%agesare being #urge2 of their content. th has thus beco%ing the ver real ene% of truehu%anitarianis% that isB we?ve beco%e so inun2ates with su#erhero %thologi5ation of real

worl2 events that the e%be22e2 #aternalis% an2 unrealistic goals go unnotice2.&- A22itionallBthis narrative reinforces a victi%olog of the 9ther? an2 in fact ca#italises on itB whilesi%ultaneousl hi2ing the #aternalistic an2 neo7colonialist i2eologies in hu%anitarian garb. 'he

role of the %e2ia an2 consciousl generate2 an2 2isse%inate2 i%ages is #articularl#ronounce2 hereB as #assion an2 s#ectacle are value2 in the co%%o2ification of i%ages overcontent an2 histor. Mean +au2rillar2 states 'here is no #ossible 2istinctionB at the level ofi%ages an2 infor%ationB between the s#ectacular an2 the s%bolicB no #ossible 2istinction

between the cri%e? an2 the crack2ownG.&!

[18]


14/129


Afg!anistan Stabilit% lin'#!e goal of stabili0ing Afg!anistan as a single nation state constructs bor*ersaroun* t!e countr%( #!is creates a false i*ea of a single nation state t!at inscribesan i*entit% onto t!e Afg!ani peopleFa!mu* #rof law @ Seatle 2E1E 'aabB C9L9N$AL CA0'910A:H$S AN):9S'C9L9N$AL +90)0SI 'H UNN)$N1 A0 $N AN) A09UN) AF1HAN$S'ANG+rookln Mournal of $nt?l LawB ;ol. ,-I!As :akistan?s active su##ort of U.S. warefforts increase2B Afghan %ilitants %a2eco%%on cause with religious %ilitants a%ong the:ashtun tribes of FA'A. :akistan?s %ilitarB 2esigne2 for conventional warfare on its eastern bor2erwith $n2iaB was ill7#re#are2 totackle this new kin2 of conflictthat sli##e2 across its western bor2er.G,&-As a resultB :akistanvacillate2 between %ilitar o#erationsagainst the %ilitantsan2 #eace 2eals with the%.,&!$n the%eanti%eB %ilitants starte2 to e=ten2 their areaofinfluence beon2FA'ABthebuffer to abufferBG into NF: an2 beon2.,&,$n the %i2st of all thisB :akistan stan2sfir% that the )uran2Line berecogni5e2 an2 res#ecte2 as an international bor2erB while its %ilitar consi2ersAfghanistan within :akistan?s securit

#eri%eter.G,&3 9n the other han2BAfghanistan %aintains the #osition that it 2oes not acce#tthe)uran2Line because it has raise2 a wall between the two brothers.G,&4'his stor of the)uran2 Line is a %ore than centur7long saga of #re2ator colonialis%B#ostcolonial insecuritiesBan2 incessant conflict. 'his is a tale of colonial cartogra#h be6ueathe2to a #ostcolonial for%ationB bringing in its wake bitter fruits of o##ressionB violenceB an2 war. $turn now to the broa2er 6uestions of the challenges colonial bor2ers #resent to #ostcolonial

states an2 the role of international law.Forge2 on the anvil of %o2ern uro#ean histor an2 enshrine2 in %o2ern international lawB%o2ern statehoo2 an2 sovereignt are 2ee%e2 the #reserve of 2ifferentiate2 nationsG e=isting

within e=clusive 2efine2 territories. hile the struggle to #ro2uce citi5ens out of recalcitrant#eo#le accounts for %uch of what #asses for histor in %o2ern ti%esBG the #rotot#e of thenation7stateG co%bines a singular national i2entit with state sovereigntB un2erstoo2 as theterritorial organi5ation of unshare2 #olitical authorit. the territorialit of the nation7stateGseeEs to i%#ose su#re%e e#iste%ic control in creating the citi5en7subEect out of in2ivi2uals.Ginventing boun2aries an2 i%agining co%%unities work together to naturali5e the fiction ofciti5enshi#. o2ern interational law un2erscores this sche%a. $t e=ten2s recognition onl to the national for%B with acce#tanceattache2 to abilit to hol2 territor in tune with estern #atterns of #olitical organi5ation.G,(!As a result the nation7stateG is the 2o%inant i%aginar of organi5e2 sovereignt to2a. 'his s#atiall boun2e2i%aginarB one that fra%es both the geogra#h of actuali5ing self72eter%ination an2 the or2erof the resulting #olitical unitB #ut in circulation a territorialist e#iste%olog.G,(, :ostcolonialfor%ations ha2 to subscribe to this urocentric gra%%ar of state7for%ation to secure eligibilitin the inter7state legal or2er.,(3 'his statist fra%e #reclu2es i%aginative flowerings of self72eter%ination in tune withthe interests an2 as#irations of 2iverse co%%unities both within an2 beon2 receive2 colonial boun2aries.Across the global SouthBcolonial 2e%arcations of 5ones of control an2 influence left in their wake#olitical units lacking corres#on2ence between their territorial fra%e an2 the cohesion ofculture an2 #olitical i2entit. ,(4 'he colonial 2e%arcationsB with little regar2 for the historB cultureB orgeogra#h of the regionBoften s#lit cultural units or #lace2 2ivergent cultural i2entities within aco%%on boun2ar.,(/ As a conse6uenceB the crisis of the #ostcolonial stateste%s fro% its artificial boun2aries an2 the s#ecter of the colonial Q OstillP haunts the#ostcolonial nationBG ,(& an2 the retros#ective illusionG ,(( of nationalis% re%ains sus#en2e2forever in the s#ace between the e=7colon an2 not7et7nation.G ,(8 )ecoloni5ation %ove%ents

an2 #ostcolonial states a2o#te2 an2 retaine2 the construct of a territoriall boun2 nation7stateGeven as the atte%#te2 to i%agine the nationG at variance fro% its uro#eaniterations.,(*$%#rison%ent in inherite2 colonial territorial cartogra#hiesB #ostcolonialfor%ations inverte2 this gra%%ar to #ro2uce state7nations.+uil2ing of state7nations #rocreates the #roble% of %inoritiesB ethnicitiesB ethno7nationalis%B se#aratis%B an2 sub7statenationalis%. O'Phe nation 2rea2s 2issentG ,8- an2 the nation7state?s li%its i%#licate its geogra#hic #eri#heries as central to its

self7fashioning.G,8!$n the #rocess a co7constitutive role of nationG an2 ethnicit 2evelo#s as a#ro2uctive an2 2ialectical 2a2.G,8, $t is b the construction of ethnicit as a #roble%G thatthe nationG beco%es the resolution an2 the state incarnates itself as the authoritative #roble%

[1=]


15/129


Afg!anistan Stabilit% Bin'solver. $n this wa often the ver %icro#olitics of #ro2ucing the nation areres#onsible for itsun%aking orunraveling.G,83$ncessant rhetoric of en2anger%ent an2 2iscursive #ro2uctionofthreats to thenation ren2er nation7buil2ingG acoercive enter#rise an2 facilitate theover2evelo#%ent of thecoercive a##aratuses of the state.,84 hile inherite2 boun2ariesre#resent the #ostcolonial state7nation?s geo7bo2BG,8/ cultural an2 ethnic heterogeneit

within in2uces geo7#iet.G,8&$t is no sur#riseB thenB that %ost #ostcolonial states have astheirraison 2?etre the #ro2uctionB %aintenanceB an2 re#ro2uction of the 2iscourses an2a##aratuses of national securit.,8('hecareer of :akistan as a #ostcolonial statecircu%scribe2

withinan inherite2 territorial fra%esubstantiates this #olitical gra%%ar.

[1>]


16/129


Afg!anistan + Specific Impact#!e affirmatives construction *oes violence to Afg!anistan b% manipulating!istor% in or*er to fit t!e American conception of t!e worl*, t!is marginali0es

Afg!ani voicesCrowe 2' L.A. 'he Fu55 )rea%GI )iscourseB Historical %thsB an2 ilitari5e2inSecurit 7$nterrogating 2angerous %ths of Afghanistan an2 the est?Rhtt#I>>archive.sgir.eu>u#loa2s>Crowe7loricrowe.#2fe nee2 to navigate criticall an2 cautiousl through the %ulti#le storiesB silencesB an2 co%#le= an2 contra2ictor narratives that lie

beneth the surface of i%#erial %ths. auf%anB for e=a%#leB e=#lains thatin or2er to stu2 inci2ences of ethnicconflictB we %ust begin b tring to hear the %ria2 narratives an2 2ifferent assu%#tions an2co%bine insights fro% %ulti#le %etho2ological an2 theoretical a##roaches.!-/ e nee2 toun2erstan2 that so%e #eo#le are Eust written out of historG!-&B an2 the stories of histor areso #artial an2 there is so %uch those of us in the est 2on?t see that we can never believe that

we have arrive2 at a truth? or realit?I Histor is never Eust si%#l the #ast?. Nor is historsi%#l its official ren2eringQHistor is %a2e while ol2 histories are si%ultaneousl re#ro2uce2B without %ost of us everowning the stor tol2Q9nce $ see inter#retation is alrea2 e%be22e2 in the ver #rocess of thought $ recogni5e that there is a beforethat $ cannot co%#letel ever know or recover. 'he ver i2ea of histor itself is 2estabili5e2 as a #rocess of stortelling with 2ifferentstortellersQ$ therefore nee2 to know whose stor $ a% rea2ingB who is telling the storB an2 fro% what ti%eboun2 lens it is beingtol2.!-(:erha#s the best res#onse isB as :eter Hul%e suggestsI to rea2 s#eculativelB recogni5ing that the stor can never be full

recovere2B an2 that which has been recovere2 is often 2istorte2 an2 %anufacture2.G!-8'here are e%anci#ator#ossibilities in a critical #roEect of 2iscourse 2econstructionI it lies in the recognition of the2etri%ental effects of i%#erialB neo7colonialB orientalist %ths? an2 the #olic agen2as that are%a2e #ossible through the%. + beginning to 2elve into the co%#le= an2 interrelate2 factors of Afghanistan?s histor inthe #revious sectionB the 2angers of historical narratives that conceal these ele%ents start to beco%e

visibleI + %th %an has live2B 2ie2 an2 " all too often " kille2.G!-* hile #ressure %ust be#ut on the %essengers of violent an2 2eliberatel %thsB we %ust also take res#onsibilit an2listen criticall to the %ulti#le narratives aroun2 us in or2er to reali5e a %ore #ano#ticG!!-

vision un2erstan2ingB nonethelessB that we can never achieve a whole or co%#leteun2erstan2ing or truthG. As we listen to the antithetical %thologies that tear our worl2 a#artBG argues Ar%strong wenee2 to be rece#tive to the counter7narrative that o##oses our #oint of view an2 e=#resses the other? #ers#ective.G!!!9ne wa tosee? without an i%#erial or colonial ga5e is to connect heterogeneit into a for% of collective asse%blageG in a )eleu5ian an21uattarian sense that isB acce#t concrete %ulti#licities in or2er to see variation without con6uest.!!, hat are the historical %ths

being #ro2uce2 as we s#eakDill histor books teach oung chil2ren stories about uncivili5e2? an2barbaric? AfghanistanB harborer of evil an2 usli% terroristsB save2 b the heroic an2technologicall vanguar2 strategies of estern %ilitariesD All %ths are #olitical an2 e%bo2 a

ver #articular an2 #ower infuse2 re#resentation about how the worl2 works. e %usthistorici5e #articular for%s of knowle2ge an2 acknowle2ge their #artialit b un#acking thetheories that un2er#in the factsG #ro2uce2 b situate2 knowle2ge?s A thicker an2 %oreco%#le= vision of hu%anit is urgentl nee2e2.G!!3 $fB as 'alor #ronouncesB histor an2 its%ths are not in2ee2 about the #astB but rather the futureB than the 6uestion we %ustcontinuall ask ourselves an2 of other %th #ro2ucersB as we are all i%#licate2 in this #rocessis what kin2 of worl2 is being #ro2uce2 through what %ths an2 who is benefiting an2 who is

being 2isa##eare2D

[1@]


17/129


Afg!anistan + #urns Case#!e reason t!at we go to war in places li'e Afg!anistan is because of violentrepresentationsCrowe 2' L.A. 'he Fu55 )rea%GI )iscourseB Historical %thsB an2 ilitari5e2inSecurit 7$nterrogating 2angerous %ths of Afghanistan an2 the est?Rhtt#I>>archive.sgir.eu>u#loa2s>Crowe7loricrowe.#2fh 2o we? see what we see when we see itB an2 wh 2o we not see what we 2on?t see when we 2on?tD& 'his essa argues for theurgent nee2 to criticall interrogate 2iscourses of foreign intervention an2 highlights the #olitical i%#lications of failing to 2o so. +

co%#licatingB interrogatingB an2 historici5ing #articular narratives an2 re#resentations of Afghanistan an2contrasting narratives of the est?( it si%ultaneousl reveals how the recent foreigninterventions in Afghanistan have reflecte2 co%%ensurabilit with these narratives an2 how the

est?s #ractical engage%ent with the site of Afghanistan has refelecte2 an2 serve2 to re#ro2ucethe%. At this critical %o%ent in worl2 #oliticsB successful #olic %aking relies on %aintaining#ublic su##ort an2 %th7%aking is #laing a ke role in #ro2ucing aco%#licit>nationalistic>ignorant>fearful au2ienceI )er )erian #rovi2es so%e useful insight inlight of a 2iscussion of a global in terrore%G thrust into the s#otlight following the *>!! attackson the US orl2 'ra2e CenterI :eo#le go to warbecause of !ow t!e% seeB #erceiveB #ictureBi%agineB an2 s#eak of others that isB how the construct t!e *ifference of ot!ers as well as

the sa%eness of the%selves through re#resentationsG.8 'he inti%ate relationshi# between2iscourseB the %e2iaB an2 #olic7%aking is irrefutable.

#!eir conception of bor*ers an* geopolitics is w!at creates conflict in Afg!anistanFa!mu* #rof law @ Seatle 2E1E 'aabB C9L9N$AL CA0'910A:H$S AN):9S'C9L9N$AL +90)0SI 'H UNN)$N1 A0 $N AN) A09UN) AF1HAN$S'ANG+rookln Mournal of $nt?l LawB ;ol. ,-I!Must as none of us is outsi2e or beon2 geogra#hB none of us is co%#letel free fro% the struggle over geogra#h. 'hat struggle isco%#le= an2 interesting because it is not onl about sol2iers an2 cannons but also about i2easB about for%B about i%ages an2

i%aginings.,& )rawing boun2aries is the inaugural gesture of the lawB while #olicing boun2aries isits routine function. 'he genesis of law signals that OtPhe #ri%or2ial scene of the no%os o#ens with a 2rawing of a line in thesoil Q to %ark the s#ace of one?s own.G,(o2ern law?s insistent clai%s of its universalit notwithstan2ingBlines of 2e%arcation that se#arate legalit fro% illegalit often create 5ones where bo2ies an2

s#aces are #lace2 on the other si2e of universalitB a %oral an2 legal no %an?s lan2B whereuniversalit fin2s its s#atial li%it.G ,8aterial an2 2iscursive or2ers that enEo hege%on in ansetting fashion an2 enable instru%ents to 2raw these lines an2 carve out such 5ones. 'he storof the )uran2 Line testifies to this #heno%enon.'he )uran2 Line was 2rawn b a colonial #ower in the nineteenth centurB which was a 2efining#hase in the consoli2ation of %o2ern regi%es of knowle2geB along with the suturing ofe#iste%olog with the state. ,* 'hereforeB it is critical to i2entif the conce#tual ense%ble thatfurnishe2 the scaffol2ing for such a venture. #osition is that the conce#tual an2 2iscursivea##aratus of international lawB %o2ern geogra#hB geo#oliticsB an2 bor2ers are interwoven inthe enabling fra%e that %a2e the 2rawing of this conflict7ri22en 2ivi2ing line #ossible.

[1]


18/129


Afg!anistan + Alternative Solves.ffective engagement in Afg!anistan requires t!at we un*erstan* *ominant powernarratives, t!e alternatives t!oug!t comes prior to concrete actionCrowe 2' L.A. 'he Fu55 )rea%GI )iscourseB Historical %thsB an2 ilitari5e2inSecurit 7$nterrogating 2angerous %ths of Afghanistan an2 the est?Rhtt#I>>archive.sgir.eu>u#loa2s>Crowe7loricrowe.#2f goal is twofol2I ! to reveal the i%#ortance of criticall interrogating 2iscourse which isinfuse2 with hierarchical #ower structures that influence #olitical action an2 #er#etuate

violence on #articular bo2iesB an2 , to show through an analsis of the 2iscourses aroun2 theintervention in AfghanistanB nationalist %ilitar res#onse has been legiti%i5e2 in the na%e ofliberationB 2e%ocracB an2 2evelo#%ent while si%ultaneousl occlu2ing the role of the est in

Afghanistan?s self7sustaining war econo%. $ 2o this first through a theoretical 2iscussion of%th>2iscourse an2 the %e2iu%s through which the can be 2e#loe2 such as the %e2ia. 'hesecon2 section of the #a#er illustrates these argu%ents through an analsis of the %ths that2o%inate2 the %e2ia beforeB 2uringB an2 after the %ilitar intervention in Afghanistan.'hrough this case stu2 $ criticall engage in a 2iscursive analsis of the ele%ents that are2e#loe2 in the 2o%inant %ths which serve to legiti%i5e a long histor of i%#erial interventiones#eciall in the i22le ast conte=t. Herein las the #otential to reveal the negative an2 violent

#ower of 2iscourse an2 %thconstruction b failing to 6uer the naturalnessG of histori%#ortant contra2ictions an2 connections are obfuscate2 an2 i%#erial logic gets re#ro2uce2.New routes to seeingG e=#lains $%%anual allersteinB are nee2e2 to la bare the #owerstructures that cover over histor.G* Atte%#ts at un2erstan2ing #olitical situations an2 engagingin international intervention an2 2i#lo%ac in #laces such as Afghanistan re6uire that we

beco%e aware of 2o%inant narratives that are #ro2uce2B criticall interrogate who is#ro2ucing the% an2 for what #ur#oseB how the are being 2isse%inate2B an2 un2erstan2 what isat stake in failing to 2o so.

[1?]


19/129


Afg!anistan + :iscourse "irstAn% polic% t!at fails to ta'e into account t!e *iscursive et!os surroun*ingAfg!anistan is *oome* to failure an* error replicationCrowe 2' L.A. 'he Fu55 )rea%GI )iscourseB Historical %thsB an2 ilitari5e2inSecurit 7$nterrogating 2angerous %ths of Afghanistan an2 the est?Rhtt#I>>archive.sgir.eu>u#loa2s>Crowe7loricrowe.#2f'he historical #ro2uction of #articular %ths of Afghanistan have relie2 on re#resentations ofthe countr in the est that are largel si%#listicB ahistoricalB an2 #oliticall %otivate2.

Afghanistan is a sort of fu00% *reamG for %ost in the estI e%bo2ie2 in a series of fabricate2i%ages of war an2 #overtB 2e7conte=tuali5e2 #hotos without na%es or #lacesB nu%bers an2gra#hs clai%ing statistical 6uantificationB an2 2isEointe2 et often re#eate2 #hrases an2%eta#hors. A #articular %thic re#resentation of Afghanistan is being an2 has been #roliferate2 in the internationalco%%unitB through %e2iaB histor booksB foreign #olic 2ocu%entsB #olitical co%%entatorsB aca2e%iaB an2 virtuall an other

bo2 of co%%unication. 'he vigor with which #articular 2iscourses have %ateriali5e2 since *>!! arere#resentative of their link to the ests %ilitari5e2 ar on 'error? an2 %ore generall of thee%be22e2 relationshi# between #olitical #olicies an2 %ilitari5e2 2iscourses which legiti%ate the

est?s %ilitar engage%ent an2 2evelo#%ent #olicies. 'hat isB Afghanistan serves as anunfortunate e9ample of t!e ver% real power of *iscourse an* m%t!-ma'ing w!ic!

affect t!e form t!at international engagement ta'es this in turn re#ro2uces those%ths in a ccle of 2estructive i%#erial engage%ent. $n tring to un2erstan2 the current#olitical situation in AfghanistanB an2 in atte%#ting to for%ulate international #olic in theregionB it is vital that we are aware of the 2o%inant narratives or %ths? that are being#ro2uce2B who it is that is #ro2ucing the% an2 for what #ur#oseB an2 what is at stake in failingto interrogate the%.An% polic% that 2oes not take the role of 2eliberatel constructe2narratives an2 the %e2iu%s through which the are 2isse%inate2 into account will not onlcontinue to re#licate the%B #erha#s unknowinglB but an securiti5ingGB #eacebuil2ingG an22evelo#%entG efforts built on these ter%s can never result in long7ter% success. 'he e%anci#ator#ossibilities of such a critical #roEect of 2iscourse 2econstruction lie inI ! un2erstan2ing the race2>classe2>gen2ere2 #owerhierarchies that are their foun2ation , uncovering the nationali5e2 %ilitari5ation an2 the h#er%asculini5e2 an2 h#erfe%ini5e2nor%ativities that are are e%be22e2 within these %thsB an2 3 the recognition of the 2etri%ental effect of the est?s %ths? an2

configuring the reconce#tualisation of #olic alternatives through its contestation. + looking criticall at what has

beco%e the co%%on language of foreign engage%ent in AfghanistanB the foun2ation ofhistorical narratives or %ths? that #er#etuate a certain i%age of AfghanistanB an2 which in turnresults in ver #articular attitu2es that i%bue foreign #olicB begin to be reveale2. $ will utili5e twobroa2 an2 ine=tricabl linke2 categori5ations which %ost accuratel enca#sulate the 2o%inant strains of 2iscourse to hel# clarifhow this relationshi# is constructe2 an2 b thus i2entifing the% as such atte%#t to 2e7bunk the %ths the create. 'hese %ths?which have beco%e nor%ali5e2 an2 banal in foreign #olicB %e2iaB an2 so%e aca2e%ic 2iscourse $ 2efine as the herois%?2iscourse>%th an2 the %ilitari5ation? 2iscourse>%th.

[1D]


20/129


Gioweapons Bin'#!eir notion of protecting t!e people from a biological weapon is not!ing moret!an an attempt to soli*if% state control over t!e population( Attempts to control

biological weapons simpl% re-create a 0one of in*istinction b% furt!ering statecontrol over t!e lives an* *eat!s of t!e population


21/129


Gioterrorism Bin'Gioterrorist *epictions are meant as a wa% of *efining national boun*aries inopposition to an e9ternal terrorist ot!er( It relies upon a view of *isease as a t!reatto national securit% t!at *efaults to t!e i*entification of certain groups as t!ose

w!o carr% t!e virus, allowing for t!e e9clusion of t!ose i*entit% categories for t!egoo* of t!e nation

isecup 'hesis in nglish @ 'e=as 'ech2'> elleB VCLUS$9NA0W AC'SI 1N)0B 0ACB AN) :$)$9L91W $NL$'0A0W S:ACSG htt#I>>(,.!4.,-/.!-4>searchD6bitstrea%>,34&>!!8->!>VCLUS$9NA0WAC'S.#2fXY,,heatherXschellY,,X2iscourseXY,,bir2XfluY,,Zhl

A$)S as 2angerous travelers who #ur#osel infect others. As the #rece2ing cha#ters haveatte%#te2 to 2e%onstrate an2 as a consi2eration of bioterroris% affir%sB 6uarantine is integralto the task of reifing bor2ersB %aking visible or i%agining into e=istence the 2ifferences

between in2ivi2uals an2 co%%unities on the basis of #hsical %arkers like race an2 gen2erB atask increasingl #lae2 out in 2iscursive conte=ts 'he recent an=iet regar2ing bioterroris%

reveals that twent7first centur A%erica continues to utili5e the 2iscourse of 2isease to 2efineco%%unal an2 in2ivi2ual i2entitiesB reinforcing % argu%ent that there is no outsi2e toe#i2e%iological thought. As the #ossibilities of bioterroris% are researche2 an2 2iscusse2B2isease beco%es not onl a %aEor threat to national securit but also a rhetorical %eans of2escribing terrorists an2 2istancing health citi5ens fro% the foreign threat. For instanceB the#ossibilit of geneticall engineere2 s%all#o= virus resistant to vaccine en2angers nationalsecurit while #rovi2ing a %eans of 2escribing the terrorists who %ight use the virus. Si%ilarlBthe e=istence of a vaccine resistant %ouse#o= le2 to the assu%#tion that a rogue state orterrorist grou# %ight be able to achieve this Ovaccine resistantP result with s%all#o=B the2evastating hu%an virus iller 3!!. 'his news richochete2 through ashingtonB whosenational securit co%%unit ha2 beco%e increasingl concerne2 about the nation?s

vulnerabilit to the #ossible re7e%ergence of s%all#o= as a terrorist threatG 3!!. $n the conte=tof the anthra= lettersB the #ossibilit that terrorists %ight engineer ol2 2iseases or release newones continues to haunt the national securit a2visors. 'he bioterrorist threat haunts scienceBtooI att eselsonB a biologist 2oing research on the )NA of 2iseasesB uses the ver 2iscourseof the 2iseases he researches to 2escribe bioterroristsI Are we reall so sure that we?reco%#letel enlightene2 after ten thousan2 ears of reco2e2 historB even though Hitler was notthat long agoD? O . . .P Are we now cure2 of such thingsD?G 3!4. +ioterroris% is 2efining thetask of science as curing the nation of the threat of both e#i2e%ics an2 outsi2ers it alsore6uires that we think criticall about how language is use2 to cureG co%%unities ofe#iste%ological an2 %aterial 2iseases b acts of 6uarantine. As we increase our awareness ofhow we utili5e the 2iscourse of 2isease for %e2icalB culturalB an2 #olitical %eansB it also beco%esi%#ortant to e=a%ine how accounts of e#i2e%ics like SA0SB A$)SB s%all#o=B or avian bir2 fluconflate an=iet about bioterroris% with that regar2ing 2isease an2 how these co%#eting2iscourses fashion conte%#orar i2entit

[21]


22/129


C!ina Bin'#!e affirmative views C!ina as a 'nowable ob)ect + t!eir prescription of certain

values onto t!e C!inese i*entit% is violent an* results in self-fulfilling violence tocontain a t!reat


23/129


C!ina Bin'#!e affirmative assigns meaning to C!ina b% constructing it as a rival an* t!reat +t!is *iscursive construction is ot!eri0ing an* violentCheng=in


24/129


C!ina .ngagement Bin'.ngagement framewor's are not neutral + it creates a !ierarc!% in w!ic! t!e%must rel% on us in or*er to evolveCheng=in 9ther2iscourse of China as o##ortunit.? 'he crucial con2uit of this engage%ent? #olic has been freetra2e facilitate2 through a variet of %ultilateral econo%ic institutions an2 internationalregi%es. 'hese institutions an2 regi%esB as 0obert 1il#in notesB are un2ergir2e2 often b rulesthat re#resent the 2esires of estern uro#e an2 the Unite2 States to reassert the #ositionsthe have lost over the #ast several 2eca2es in the international sste%.G!!* Conse6uentlB thesefra%eworks within which China is to be 2ealt with are far fro% neutral. 'he i%#lication is that

China is not treate2 as an e6ual #artnerB but rather as an entit nee2ing to be engage2I theinti%ation being that without our? engage%ent or involve%entB China coul2 re%ain %ire2 inisolation an2 un2er2evelo#%entB or even 2egenerate into chaos an2 instabilit. 0obert 0ossB for oneB#ro#oses that there woul2 never have been a 2e%ocrac %ove%ent in the s#ring of !*8* without estern interaction with theChinese econo%.G!,- 'hisB $ argueB is another wa of saing what Leh%ann has sai2B the liberal global econo%ic agen2a %ust#revail an2 %ust be 2riven b the in2ustriali5e2 countries.G!,! Since engage%ent ai%s at %aking China 2o what we want it to2oBG!,, ulti%atel there is a #rice to #a on the #art of China. 'his has been vivi2l 2e%onstrate2 b one of the %ost i%#ortantcases of engage%entB? notablB the a2%ission of China into the '9. $n the long72rawn7out #rocess of Eoining this organisationBChina ha2 been subEecte2 to harsher an2 %ore rigorous ter%s of entr than an other '9 %e%ber. 9#erating in a wa re%iniscentof the 9#en )oor #olic at the turn of the twentieth centurB the estern #owersB le2 b the U.S.B %a2e a concerte2 effort to sharethe offers %a2e to the% b China an2 to ensure their accession stan2ar2s set for China were consistent. !,3 Ai%ing to use China?saccession as a te%#late for other transition econo%iesBG the 2e%an2e2 that China?s %e%bershi# be base2 on co%%erciall viableter%s.G!,4 As a conse6uenceB ChinaB now finall a %e%berB nee2s not onl to abi2e b all of the '9 rulesB but also to un2ertakee=tra obligations that e=cee2 nor%al '9 stan2ar2s.!,/

[2=]


25/129


C!ina + Alternative Solves#!e alternative creates a better un*erstan*ing of c!ina -Cheng=in ]


26/129


C!ina + Alternative SolvesAn2 it is in this conte=t that $ have set out to write this thesisB in the belief that China as a global actor 2oes not have to be the wa itis.? For this reasonB this thesis has %a2e no #retension to be a #oliticall neutralB value7free en2eavour. Like the ortho2o= literatureB

it is itself a kin2 of 2iscourse with #ractical i%#lications. +ut as a #ractical interventionBit has sought self7consciouslnot to take si2es in accor2ance with the rea27%a2eB totalise2 categories of the est? an2ChinaB? but rather to #roble%atise the%B an2 to e=#lain an2 e%#hasise that the search for

alternativeB less 2ichoto%ise2 was of #erceiving an2 2ealing with Sino7estern relationscannot continue to be 2eferre2. hile this thesis has not been s#ecificall 2esigne2 to offer such alternativesB it hasnevertheless in2icate2 in various was that alternatives are not onl necessar an2 #ossibleB but also e=istent. As state2 at the outsetof this thesisB scholars such as 'ani . +arlowB +ruce Cu%ingsB 0e ChowB Meffre asserstro%B a%ong othersB have alrea2 begune=#loring so%e was of inter#reting Sino7estern relations beon2 the conventional 2iscursive an2 %etho2ological boun2aries.an works $ have use2 in a2vancing % argu%ents throughout this thesis coul2 further serve as #ossible e=a%#les in this regar2.

An2 in a22itionB although this thesis is largel critical in toneB it has not been entirel negative. +criticising an26uestioning the conventional stu2 of ChinaB it hasB if %ainl in2irectlB suggeste2 how China?sinternational relations coul2 be stu2ie2 2ifferentl. $n this senseB $ ho#e that it coul2 %ake a s%all contributionnot onl to an i%#ortant file2 of stu2 but also to the i%#rove%ent or reconstruction of Sino7 estern relations. For all thisB there isno eas alternative answer nor %agic solution to the #roble%s 2iscusse2 here. For e=a%#leB while it %a be useful an2un2erstan2able to a2vocate bringing in %ore Chinese scholars or %ore insi2e? views to the so far estern2o%inate2 fiel2 ofChinese foreign relations stu2ies as an anti2ote to its #re2ica%entB!( it is wrong to assu%e that Chinese voices fro% the insi2e? arenecessaril closer to Chinese realities.!8 ForB as $ have suggeste2 in this stu2B the was in which the Chinese #erceive the%selvesan2 the worl2 are often alrea2 coloure2 b ortho2o= estern 2iscoursesB an2 %a therefore be #art of the #roble%B rather than the

solution.

[2@]


27/129


C!ina + :iscourse "irst:iscourse s!apes realit% in t!e conte9t of S-C!ina polic% + its a priorconsi*eration to concrete actionCheng=in


28/129


C!ina + A2 Jealism oo*#!eir realist i*eals are a self-fulfilling prop!ec%, results in neorealist violenceCheng=in 9ther fra%eworkB it is i%#erative thatChina be treate2 as an absolute threat so that U.S. #re#on2erance in the #ost7Col2 ar worl2 ingeneral an2 in Asia in #articular can continue to be legiti%ate2 an2 %aintaine2. 'husB not onl2oes this re2uctionist re#resentation co%e at the e=#ense of nuance2 un2erstan2ing of China asa 2na%icB %ultifacete2 countrB but it is also res#onsible for the creation of the #olic ofcontain%ent whichB even in the guise of crisis %anage%entB? can have a highl 2ra%atic i%#acton U.S.7China relationsB as the !**/7!**& %issile crisis an2 the ,--! s# #lane inci2ent have

vivi2l atteste2. Like in the #astB the threat>contain%ent? theor as #ractice is not onlconfrontational in itselfB but also ten2s to have a self7fulfilling effect in ter%s of har2eningChinese worl2view an2 foreign behaviour a the%e $ will take u# in Cha#ter (. For instanceB

shoul2 the U.S. #ress ahea2 with a %issile 2efence shiel2 to both contain China an2 guarantee?its own invulnerabilitB it woul2 be al%ost certain to intensif China?s sense of vulnerabilit an2co%#el it to e=#an2 its current s%all nuclear arsenal to %aintain the cre2ibilit of its li%ite22eterrence. As a resultB it is far fro% unthinkable that the two countriesB an2 #ossibl the wholeregionB %ight be 2ragge2 into an escalating ar%s race that woul2 ulti%atel %ake war %orelikel. $n this res#ectB Chal%ers Mohnson is right when he suggests that A #olic of contain%enttowar2 China i%#lies the #ossibilit of warB Eust as it 2i2 2uring the Col2 ar vis7]7vis thefor%er Soviet Union. 'he balance of terror #revente2 war between the Unite2 States an2 theSoviet UnionB but this %a not work in the case of China.G!/-

[2?]


29/129


C!ina + A2 C!ina is a #!reatC!ina is a t!reat primaril% because our *iscursive construction of it as a t!reatCheng=in A%erican self7i2entit as a global rational being an2 in2is#ensable lea2er. Heroic lea2ershi# woul2 not be so nee2e2 ifthere was little left to fight for. Clearl %in2ful of thisB 1eorgi ArbatovB )irector of oscow?s $nstitute for the Stu2 of the USA an2Cana2aB tol2 a U.S. au2ience the ear before the colla#se of the +erlin allI e are going to 2o so%ething terrible to ouJwe are

going to 2e#rive ou of an ene%.G/3 hile he correctl note2 thatfor the U.S. to live without an i2entit72efining

ene% is terrible in2ee2B Arbatov was onl half rightB for the ene%? itself often has no controlover its status as an ene%. 0atherB as note2 beforeB it is #ri%aril a rea27%a2e 2iscursivecategor built into the A%erican self7i%agination. ith this 2iscursive categor as the analticalfra%ework for un2erstan2ing other actors on the worl2 stageB estern an2 #articularl

A%erican scholars 2i2 not si%#l 2iscover? a China threat out there it was cognitivelconstructe2 beforehan2.

[2D]


30/129


.conom% Bin'Capitalist economics are base* on relations of power over certain people, t!eirlogic *isempowers an* e9clu*es certain populations for not fitting t!e i*ealeconomic mol*


31/129


.conom% Bin'Capitalist economics forces commo*ities into t!e !an*s of a few in*ivi*uals,e9clu*ing t!ose w!o *o not control t!e means of pro*uction an* leaving t!em wit!not!ing but labour-value-power


32/129


"amine Bin'#!e notion of famine as cause* b% a specific scientific failure is problematic, itserves to reif% !ierarc!% between t!e first an* t!ir* worl*s, pro*ucing t!ose w!osuffer from foo* s!ortages as bare life( knowle2ge in international organi5ations or research institutes. $n Foucaul2ian ter%sBthe Science of fa%ine #ro2uces the starving subEect as a subEect of knowle2ge within a regi%e oftruth #ro2uce2 b the institutions an2 #ractices of 2evelo#%ent stu2ies. 'he co#ing strategies ofhousehol2s in fa%ine situations are stu2ie2 victi%s of fa%ine an2 refugees fro% fa%ine areinterviewe2B categori5e2B an2 counte2. 'he nu%bers that 2ie2 in a #articular fa%ine arecounte2B though how this is #ossible when con2itionsin fa%ines are often such that there is even no %eans of buring the 2ea2B we are left to i%agine.

[82]


33/129


"amine Bin'A secon2 #oint of intersection thatfoo2 shortage an2 entitle%ent theories share is that the both seefa%ine as so%ething with a cause. 'he #roble% of fa%ine is situate2 as a 6uestion suitable fortheoretical investigation bB in a broa2 senseB the scientific %etho2. 'he %o2ern e#iste%e ischaracteri5e2 b its reliance on se#aration of subEect an2 obEectB theor an2 #racticeB an2 itschoice of 6uantitative %etho2s. 'his wa of thinking #ro2uces a 2iscourse that 2istances thee%otionalB hu%ane res#onse an2 #rioriti5es the search for causa tion over the nee2 to res#on2.'heori5ing an2 e%#irici5ing fa%ine %ake it the terrain of the e=#ertB the agriculturalistB an2 the 2evelo#%ent s#ecialistB Eust as warcan beco%e the terrain of the 2efense e=#ertB the strategistB an2 the %ilitar co%%an2er. 9nl the e=#erts can tell us how the

#roble% can be tackle2 an2 what %echanis%s are at work.&, 'he reliance on e=#erts #ro2uces institutions2evote2 to the #ro2uction of knowle2ge about fa%ine within the fra%ework of #rogress7oriente2 2iscourse. Har2 facts are soughtB an2 fa%ine is e=clu2e2 fro% #olitical 2ebate. Asirsten Hastru# #oints outB this reliance on e=#erts an2 technical solutions re#resents agen2ere2 a##roach.&3 hen fa%ine is looke2 at in scientific ter%sB an connec tion with #ainsufferingB or the bo2 is taken awa. 'he relationshi# between #ersons is re%ove2. 9thera##roachesB as we shall see in the final cha#terB locate fa%ines #recisel in this relationshi#I arelationshi# between winners an2 losers. 'he %ove beon2 the view of fa%ine as a failure an2look instea2 at the functions of fa%ine an2 those who benefit fro% it.

[88]


34/129


"amine Bin'Societ% fig!ts over societ% s!oul* be organi0e*, constructins of famine an* foo*scarcit% pro*uce t!ose w!o lac' foo* as bare life, Humanitarian interventions arecentere* aroun* a *iscourse of bureaucrac% t!at is meant to e9ten* sovereigncontrol across t!e globe.:KINS,:rofessor of $nternational :olitics at the Universit of alesB 2'MennB :h) at theUniversit of alesB hose HungerD Conce#ts of Fa%ineB :ractices of Ai2B Universit ofinnesota :ressB #gs 3(74!$ have argue2 so far that%o2ernit involve2 a %ove fro% a view of foo2 as sociall 2efine2 an2 2efiningto foo2 as fuel for the hu%an organis%Ja biological view. $n althus this translates into a

vision of survival as a battle to con6uer scarcitB where hu%an technolog is #itte2 against the laws of nature. $n%o2ernit conflict is no longer a 6uestion of the resolution of #olitical issues or 6uestionsconcerning how societ shoul2 be organi5e2. $t beco%es a contest between hu%an\ an2natureB an2 #olitical issues are translate2 into biological ter%s for e=a%#leBit is a 6uestion ofresources. 'hisB as Foucault an2 subse6uent writers have argue2B is a %ove to bio#oliticsB where what is atstake is control of the biological e=istence of hu%an beingsB not their #olitical organi5ation.1iorgio Aga%ben buil2s on an2 e=ten2s Foucaults analsis of govern%entalit an2 bio#olitics.!-, Aga%ben argues that since

AristotleR:oliticsR has been foun2e2 on a se#aration between 5oe bare lifean2 bios a #oliticall 6ualifie2

life. He 2escribes Rbare lifeR as co%%on to all living beingsB but bios as a for% of liv

Documents

K Grab Bag Final Paper MNDI 2010