2006 will the 'global war on terrorism' be the new cold war

7/28/2019 2006 Will the 'Global War on Terrorism' Be the New Cold War

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2006-will-the-global-war-on-terrorism-be-the-new-cold-war 1/19

Will the 'Global War on Terrorism' Be the New Cold War?Author(s): Barry BuzanReviewed work(s):Source: International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 82, No. 6(Nov., 2006), pp. 1101-1118

Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Royal Institute of International AffairsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4122087 .

Accessed: 22/01/2013 17:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley and Royal Institute of International Affairs are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-).

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:35:18 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=riia

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4122087?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/4122087?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=riia

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black



Will heglobalwar on terrorism'

be thenewColdWar?

BARRYBUZAN*

Washingtons nowembarkedn a campaignopersuadetself,heAmerican

people ndthe est f theworld hat heglobalwaronterrorism'GWoT)willbe a longwar'. hislongwar' sexplicitlyomparedo theCold War sa similar

sort f zero-sum,lobal-scale,enerationaltrugglegainstnti-liberaldeolo-gical xtremistsho want o rule heworld. othhave een tagedsa defenceof theWest, r westernivilization,gainsthosewho would eek odestroyt.AsDonaldRumsfeldays ftheterrorists':theywill itherucceednchangingourwayof ife, r wewill ucceednchangingheirs'.' he rhetorical ove othe onceptf longwar'makesxplicit hatwas mplicitntheGWoTfromts

inception:hat tmightfferWashingtondominant,nifyingdeathatwouldenable ttoreassertnd egitimizets eadershipfglobal ecurity.he demandfor uch n deawaspalpablehroughouthe199os.When heColdWar nded,Washingtoneemedo xperiencethreateficit,nd here as stringf ttemptstofind replacementor he ovietUnion sthe nemyocus orUS foreignndmilitaryolicy: irstapan,henChina,clash fcivilizations'ndrogue tates.Noneofthese, owever,ame nywherelose omeasuringpto theCold Warand he trugglegainstommunism,hich ormore han 0years adcreatedcommonause nd sharedraminghat nderpinnedS leadershipftheWest.Theterroristttacksf9/IIofferedsolutiono this roblem,ndrightrom he

beginningheGWoT had thefeel f a big dea thatmight rovide long-termcure orWashington'shreateficit.f itcouldbe successfullyonstructedndembeddedsthe reat ewglobal truggle,twould lsounderpinhe hakyegiti-

macy fUS unipolarity,aintenancefwhichwas key oal ntheUS NationalSecuritytrategyUSNSS)of 002, and s still isible,lbeitnmoremutedones,inthe 006USNSS.2Will his trategyucceed?Will heGWoTbecome henewColdWar?

I amgratefuloOle Wievernd eneHansennd n nonymousevieweror nternationalffairsor ommentson an earlierdraft f this rticle.

'Rumsfeldoffers trategies or currentwar: Pentagonto release20-yearplan today' and 'Abizaid creditedwithpopularizing heterm, longwar"', Washingtonost, Feb. 2006,p. Ao8, http://www.washingtonpost.

com/wp-dyn/content/article/200oo6/o2/02/AR200oo6o2o2o2296.htmlnd www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2oo6/o2/o2/AR2006o2o0202242.html,ccessed17Feb. 200o6.

2 MortenKelstrup,Globalisation nd societal nsecurity: hesecuritization f terrorismndcompeting trate-

giesforglobalgovernance',n StefanoGuzzini and DietrichJung, ds,ContemporaryecuritynalysisndCopen-hagen eace esearchLondon: Routledge,2004),pp. o106-16.

Internationalffairs2: 6 (200oo6)Iioi-III8? 2006The Author(s).JournalCompilation? 2006 BlackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Barryuzan

These uestionseem tfirsto mark isagreementith herecentrgumentofKennedy-PipendRenggerhat9/IIchanged othingundamentalnworld

politics.3 hat t doespickuponis theirdeathat heonly hinghat hangedis thebelief hat omethingadchanged. hisarticles about he trengthnd

durabilityf that elief,ndwhethers a socialfact t can be used to createnew

politicalramingorworld

olitics.naddressing

hisuestion

differentiatebetween traditional aterialistnalysisfthreatwhetheromethingoes ordoesnot ose specificort fthreat,nd twhatevel)nd so-calledecuritization

analysiswhetheromethinganbesuccessfullyonstructeds a threat, ith his

understandingeing cceptedya wide and/orpecificallyelevantudience).4These wo spectsf threat ay unncloseparallel,utthey an alsobequiteseparate.tates,ikepeople, anbe paranoidconstructinghreats herenone

exist) rcomplacentignoringctual hreats).utsince t sthe uccessornot)ofthe ecuritizationhat etermineshetherction staken,hat ideof threat

analysiseservescrutinyust sclose s that iven o thematerialide.

Keepinghis istinctionnmind,he xplicitlongwar'framingf theGWoTisa securitizingove fpotentiallyreat ignificance.f t succeedss a widelyaccepted, orld-organizingacro-securitization,t could tructurelobal ecurityfor ome ecades,ntheprocess elpingo egitimizeS primacy.his s not oconfuseheGWoTwithUS grand trategyverall,espiteheGWoT'spromi-nencenthe 006USNSS. US grand trategysmuchwider,nvolving ore radi-tional oncernsbout ising owers, lobal nergyupply,he preadfmilitarytechnologynd he nlargementfthedemocratic/capitalistphere. S militaryexpenditureemainsargelyimed tmeetingraditionalhallengesrom ther

states, ith nly small artpecificallyllocatedor heGWoT.ThesignificanceoftheGWoT s muchmore olitical. lthoughreal hreatromerroristsoesexist,nd needs o bemet, hemain ignificancef theGWoT s as a politicalframinghatmightustifynd egitimizeS primacy,eadershipnd unilater-alism, oth oAmericansnd to therest f theworld.This s one of thekeydifferencesetweenheGWoT nd heCold War. heCold War retty uchwasUS grandtrategyna deep ense; heGWoT snot, ut, s a brief lancettheUSNSSof 2006will how,sbeing romoteds f twere.Whetherhis romo-tion ucceeds r notwillbe affectedymany actors,ot east owreal ndhow

deephe hreat

osed yerrorism

ctuallys.

The next section urveysherise of theGWoT as a successful acro-securitization.he onefollowingxaminesonditionshatwill ffecthe ustain-

abilityf theGWoTsecuritization.he conclusionseflectnthe onsequencesoftheGWoT houldtbecomeuccessfullymbeddeds thenewCold War. he

arguments that t isunlikely,hough ot mpossible,hat heGWoTwill be

anythingike as dominant nd durable s the macro-securitizationf theCold

3 CarolineKennedy-Pipe nd NicholasRengger, Apocalypsenow? Continuities r disjunctionsnworldpoli-tics after9/II', InternationalAffairs 2: 3, 2006, pp. 539-52.

4 Ole Waever,Securitization nddesecuritization',nRonnie D. Lipschutz, d., OnsecurityNew York: Colum-

biaUniversity ress,1995), p. 46-86; BarryBuzan,Ole Wever andJaapdeWilde,Security:newframeworkforanalysisBoulder,CO: LynneRienner,1998).

1102

Internationalffairs2: 6, 2006? 2006The Author(s).JournalCompilation ? 2006 BlackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Will heglobal ar nterrorism'e he ewCold War?

War.One of thereasons or tsfragilityspreciselyhat t s notrepresentativefUS grand trategysa whole. Anothers that hemeansused topursue heGWoTthreatenwo of thecorethings hey resupposed o be defending:iberalvaluesand theunity f theWest.

Therise ftheGWoT s thenewmacro-securitizationThe Al-Qaeda attacks n the UnitedStates n 2001brought hepost-ColdWar

periodto an abruptend. It solvedthe threat eficit roblemfor theUS, and

triggeredsubstantialhiftnsecurityefinitionsndprioritiesnmany ountries.The GWoTplayed tronglyo the ong-establishedropensityn US foreign olicyto frameAmericannterestss universal rinciples. his had workedwellduringthe Cold Warto legitimizeUS leadership.Washingtonaw tself s representingthefuture,nd thereforeaving herightnd theduty ospeak nd actforhuman-

kind, ndthis laimwas,up to a point, ccepted nmuchof therest f theWest.

Rightfrom he tart he GWoT wasalsopresentednthisway:

Atthebeginningf this ew entury,heUnited tatessagain alled yhistoryouseouroverwhelmingowern defenseffreedom. ehave cceptedhat uty, ecauseweknow he ause s ust .. we understandhat hehopes f millionsepend n us .. andweare ertainf the ictoryo come.5

So far, he GWoT has been a rather uccessfulmacro-securitization.6hat Al-

Qaeda and its ideologyare a threat o western ivilization s widely acceptedoutside he slamic

world,nd alsowithin he slamic

world, houghhere

pinionis divided s towhether r not this s a good and egitimatehing. he US-ledwar

against he Taleban andAl-Qaeda inAfghanistanhortlyfter eptember i was

generallyupported tthetime, ndNATO is stillplaying he eadingrole n the

(so farnotvery uccessful)ttempto stabilize ndrebuild hat ountry. eneathitsexaggeration,here s some realsubstance o President ush'sboast aboutthe

coalition acking heGWoT:

the ooperationfAmerica'slliesnthewaron terrorsvery, ery trong.We're rate-ful o themore han onationshat re upportingheProliferationecuritynitiativeo

interceptllegalweaponsnd quipmenty ea, and, nd ir.We're ratefulo themorethan 0nations ith orceservingn raq, nd thenearly0nations ith orcesnAf-

ghanistan.n the ightgainsterror,e've sked ur llies odo hardhings. hey've isento theiresponsibilities.e're roud ocall hem riends.7

Immediately ollowing /11 ATO invoked rticle5 forthefirst ime, hereby

helping o egitimizeheGWoT securitization.incethen eadersnmostwestern

s Dick Cheney, Success in war ismosturgentUS task,Cheney says:remarks o theCommonwealthClub of

California', Aug. 2002,http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-seIs585.html,ccessed26 Dec. 200oo5.6 Kelstrup, 'Globalisation', pp. 112-13.

7GeorgeW. Bush, PresidentBushdiscusses rogressn the waron terror',WhiteHouse, 12July 004, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/o7/2004O712-5.html,ccessed28 Dec 200oo5.

110o3

Internationalffairs2: 6, 200oo6? 2006The Author(s).JournalCompilation ? 200oo6 lackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Barryuzan

countries,utalso,conspicuously,nRussia,Chinaand ndia,have ssociatedthemselvesnd heir overnmentsith heview hatnternationalerrorismsacommon hreat.nthe aseofRussia, hina,srael nd ndia, hemovehasbeento ink heirwn ocalproblems ithterrorism'othewiderGWoTframing.

Part ftheGWoT's elativeuccess anbe attributedothewaynwhichthas

tied ogethereveralongstandingecurityoncernsrising ithinhe

iberalrder,most otablyrime nd he radesndrugsndthe echnologiesorweapons fmass estructionWMD).Within he ramefthe iberalnternationalconomicorderLIEO), it is well understoodhatwhileopening tate orders o flowsoftrade, inance,nformationnd skilled) eople s generallyobepromoted,such peninglsohas tsdark idenwhichlliberalctors,mainlyriminalsndterrorists,antake dvantagef iberalpennessnpursuitf lliberalnds.The

problemsthat he iberaltructureshat acilitateusinessctivityannot elp ut

openpathwaysor ncivilocietyctors s well.Concern bout riminalctivity(particularlyhe rugsrade) as-at leastwithin heUnited tates-been ramed

insecurityermsthewar ndrugs') or ome ecades. nd oncernbout radeinWMD is nstitutionalizednthenuclear on-proliferationegimes well s nconventionsbout hemicalndbiological eapons echnology.hesecuritizingmoves upportingheGWoThave inked llofthesessues.WithinheUnitedStates,he ink etweenerrorismnddrugseeks ograftnewerecuritizationon toanolder ne.8 he ink redates00I,and ts ssencesthe hargehat error-ists ngagen thedrugsrade s a principalource ffundingor heirctivities,oneofwhich sseekingWMD:

Asweenterhe 1stcentury,he reatesthreatsoour reedomnd ecurityill omefromnexus fnew hreats:oguetates,errorism,nternationalrime,rug raffickingand hepreadfweaponsfmass estruction.9

And:

Structuralinksetweenoliticalerrorismnd raditionalriminalctivity,uch sdrugstrafficking,rmedobberyr extortionave omencreasinglyothe ttentionf awenforcementuthorities,ecuritygenciesnd oliticalecision akers.heres fairlyacceptediewn henternationalommunityhatnrecentears,irecttateponsorship

has eclined,hereforeerroristsncreasinglyave oresortoothermeansffinancing,includingriminalctivities,norder o raise unds. hese ctivitiesave raditionallybeen rug rafficking,xtortion/collectionf revolutionaryaxes',rmedobbery,ndkidnappings.henvolvementf uchroupss he KK, TTE, ndGIAn hesectivi-ties as een stablished.'o

8 Dan Gardner,Terrorists etcashfrom rugtrade: raffickingrime ourceof funds ormanygroups', 4Sept.2001,http://www.cfdp.ca/terror.htm#trc,ccessed28 Sept. 2004; US Drug EnforcementAdministration,

Drug IntelligenceBrief,Drugs and terrorism: new perspective', ept. 2002,http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/intel/o2o39/o2o39.html,ccessed19Aug 2004.

9 Fact sheet,24 Sept. I996, Clinton initiatives n terrorism, rime,drugs',http://nsi.org/library/terrorism/terrorcrimedrugs.html,ccessed20 Sept.2004.

1o INTERPOL GeneralSecretariat, ritten estimony f Ralf Mutschke assistant irector, riminal ntelli-genceDirectorate,NTERPOL) before hearing f theCommitteeon theJudiciaryubcommittee n Crime,

IIO04

Internationalffairs2: 6, 2006O 006 The Author(s).JournalCompilation? 2006 BlackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Will heglobal ar n errorism'e he ewColdWar?

IntheEU's European ecurity trategyocument, rganized rime-especiallytraffickingn drugs,women, llegal migrantsnd weapons-and its links with

terrorism,re given together s one of fivekeythreats o Europe, alongwithterrorismtself, roliferationfWMD, regional onflict nd statefailure."This

presentation as evolved from hepre-9/II European pattern,where the main

effort ent nto ecuritizingthreat ackage inkingmmigration,rganized rimeanddrug-therebydepictingmmigrantsstherootproblem.'" venbefore9/II,these hemeswereechoedbysome ThirdWorld pokespersonseeking o ncreasetheireverage or eform ftheLIEO. Nigerian resident lusegun Obasanjo,for

example, rgued:

Werecognisehegrave hreatosedbythedebt uestion,overty,orruption,ootedfunds,errorismnddrug-traffickingothe tabilityndprosperityot nly fthe evel-

opingworld utofall countries.hey re ssentiallylobal hallengesor evelopmentandpeace, ecurity,tabilitynddevelopment.'3

In relation o the securitizationf WMD, the new twist s theadditionof a

strong oncern hatnotonly roguestates', utalsoterroristrganizations, ightacquirenuclearweaponsorotherWMD.

Thegravest angerurNation acesies tthe rossroadsfradicalismndtechnology.Ourenemies ave penly eclaredhatheyre eeking eaponsfmass estruction,ndevidencendicateshat heyredoing o with etermination.he United tateswillnotallow hese ffortso succeed.. History ill udgeharshlyhosewho sawthis omingdanger utfailed o act. n thenewworldwehave ntered,he nlypath opeace nd

securitys the ath faction.'4

And,from urope:

Proliferationfweapons f mass estructionspotentiallyhegreatesthreatoourse-

curity.. The most righteningcenarios one nwhich erroristroups cquireweaponsofmass estruction.n thisvent, small roupwould eable o nflictamagena scale

previouslyossible nly or tates nd rmies.'s

One benchmark or hesuccess chieved nlinking

heGWoT to WMD hasbeen the bility ftheUnited States ince 003to setuptheProliferationecurity

13Dec. 2o00,The threatosedbythe onvergenceforganizedrime, rugs raffickingndterrorism',

http://www.house.gov/judiciary/mutsI2x3.htm,ccessed 8Sept. 004.iiJavierolana,A secureuropen betterorld:uropeanecuritytrategyParis: uropean nion nstituteor

Securitytudies,003), p.6-9.12DidierBigo,PolicesnRtsaux:'expdrienceuropdenneParis: resses eSciencesolitiques,996); arry uzan

andOleW~ever,egionsnd owers:hetructurefnternationalecurityCambridge:ambridgeniversityress,2003), . 359.

13Agence rance-Presse,Nigerian residentrges ich-poor artnership',lobal olicyorum,0July 000oo,http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/ffd/nigeriai.htm,ccessedApril 005.

14GeorgeW.Bush,TheNationalecuritytrategyf heUnitedtatesfAmericaWashingtonC: WhiteHouse,Sept. 002).

15Solana, secureuropen betterorld,p.7-8.

Ilo5Internationalffairs2:6,200oo6? 2006 heAuthor(s).ournalompilation 2006Blackwellublishingtd/The oyal nstitutef nternationalffairs







Barryuzan

InitiativePSI). Despite eservationsboutUS unilateralism,ppositiono itsinvasion f Iraqandconcernsbout he egalityf nterceptingrade,hePSIhas ttractedarticipationrom ver 0countries.'6ven riticscknowledgeheGWoT's uccess. nAction idreportn thedistortingmpactf theGWoTonaidflows otes hatThe war n errors ike newColdWarwhere verythings

subordinatedoa single urpose.'17On this vidence,here an be little oubt hat uringhehalf-decadeince

September001 theGWoT has achieved onsiderablerogresss a macro-securitization.t hasbeen uccessfullyiednto some re-existingecuritizationsandhas achieved broad cceptance ithinnternationalociety.hequestionis: does ts uccessodategive heGWoT thepotentialobecome mbeddedsthe uccessorotheCold War?How will ventsrom ere n eithereinforcerweaken heGWoT's id obe thenewCold War?

Will heGWoTecuritizationedurable?As the ecentfurorver heDanish artoonshows,vents re argelynpredict-able:we cannotaywhowilldiewhen, rget lected hen, rwhen ome aturaldisasterilloccur.Norcanwe forecasthempactfevents, hichmay ependmuch n contextnd iming.ome ventsould e sobig hatheywipe utmostoreven llassumptionsased n historicalontinuitiesnd rendse.g. largend

rapid isen ea evels aused y fasterhanxpected eltdownftheGreenlandandAntarcticcesheets). evertheless,oncentratingnly n the ypes feventthat reboth lausiblyrobablend losely elatedo theGWoT, t spossibleo

thinkna systematicay bout heirmpactnthe ntensitynddurabilityftheGWoT ecuritization.here re ivebviousypesf event hat ould ignifi-cantlyeinforcerundermineheGWoT ecuritization:

* thempactffurthererroristlans nd/orttacksorplans r attacksuccess-

fullyttributedoterrorists);* the ommitmentftheUnited tateso theGWoT ecuritization;* the egitimacyftheUnited tates s a securitizationeaderwithinnterna-

tional ociety;*

the un)acceptabilitynd il)legitimacyfboth heGWoT securitizations awhole r ofparticularistecuritizationshat et inkedo t;* the otencyf securitizationsompetingith heGWoT.

The mpact fterroristttacksnd/or lans

Easilythemostobvioustypeof event o influence hedurabilityf theGWoTsecuritization illbe thesuccess fAl-Q,eda andits mitators nd successorsn

i6 MarkValencia, TheProliferationecuritynitiative, delphiPaper 376 London: Internationalnstitute orSecu-

rity Studies, 2oo5).

'7 JohnCosgrave, The impactof thewaronterrorn aid flows',Action id, I March 2004,p. I, http://www.actionaid.org.uk/Ioo235/our_research.html,ccessed24 Feb. 2006.

IIo6

Internationalffairs2: 6, 2006

? 200oo6heAuthor(s).ournal ompilation 2006Blackwellublishingtd/The oyal nstitutef nternationalffairs







Will heglobal ar nterrorism'e he ewCold War?

sustaining sufficientevel of attacks ndprovocationsofeedthesecuritization.

AnalystsikePaulWilkinsonwho are themselvesart f the ecuritizing rocess)arguethatthe struggle gainstAl-Qaeda is likelyto endurefor some decadesahead'-not leastbecause,withnetworks n 60 countries, l-Qaeda is themost

widely dispersed on-state erroristetwork nhistory'.'8While it is impossible

topredictwhatterroristsilldo, thespectrumfoptions anges rom eduction,throughmoreofthe ame, o escalation. eductionmeans hat heterroristhreatfades nto thebackgroundnd becomes an acceptable artof everydayiferisks.Thiscouldhappenbecause he erroristause oses team or nternal easons,nd/orbecause ountermeasuresecomeeffectivenough ofoilmost ttacks.More ofthe same means omethingikewhatwe havehad since9/II,witha fairly egulardrumbeat fmedium-sized ttacks ufficiento causelocal disruptionnd some

general ngst, ut not on a scale sufficientither o threatenheoperation f the

global economy r to causemajorupheavalsntherelationshipetween tate nd

society. scalationmeansthat he terrorists' otivation ndorganization emain

strong,ountermeasuresreonlypartly ffective,ndperiodically,r evenworseregularly,omeeffective,igh-casualtynd/or igh-costttacks remounted nsofttargets, iththeworst asebeinguse ofWMD. The escalation ptionwould

strengthenheGWoT securitization,nd the reduction ptionwould weaken t.Moreofthe amedoesnot ook sufficientosustainhe osts f a long-termmacro-securitizationnless hefear f escalation anbe maintainedta high evel.

One cannotrule out thepossibility hatgovernments ith a strongvestedinterestnmaintainingheGWoT securitizationmostobviouslyRussia,China,India and the Bush and Blair administrations) ightresort o agent rovocateur

actions norder o strengthenterroristthreat' hathad itself ecome too weakto serve hepolitical urposes fmaintaininghe GWoT securitization.incethe

agencies hatdealwithcounterterrorismreamongthemost ecretivengovern-ment, ndsince hese gencies ontrol eportingfallegedterroristlotsuncov-ered ndfoiled, heresquite bitofscopeformanipulations anging rompin owholesalefabrication.herewill always, f course,be conspiracyheorists howill think hisanyway; ut we havealready eentreated o enoughgovernmentlying, ecrecy, eception, nd abandonment f legaland moralprinciples uringtheGWoT togivethis ption omeplausibility. nd,aswillbecome clearbelow,

whattheterroristso,orarethoughtobe capableofdoing,maywellbe themostcrucialvariable ffectinghesustainabilityfthesecuritization.fdone convinc-

ingly, uch action couldhelpto sustain heGWoT. But if done andexposed, twouldhelpto underminets egitimacy.

The ommitmentftheUS to theGWoT ecuritization

Since theUnited Stateswas the initiator f theGWoT after /II, and remainsits eader, ts commitment ill be a crucialfactorn whether hesecuritization

I8 PaulWilkinson, nternationalerrorism:he hanginghreatnd he U's response,haillotPaper84 Paris:EuropeanUnion Institute for Security Studies, 2oo5), pp. 13-16, 25.

IIo7

Internationalffairs2: 6, 200oo6? 2006 The Author(s).JournalCompilation ? 200oo6lackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Barryuzan

flourishesr fails. n theface f t,there s every eason o think hat heUScommitmentill tay trong. egions fthe ommentariatn both ides f theAtlanticave bserved owdeeplyhe /11ttacksmpactedntheUnited tates,and hismpactasbeen layedo and trengthenedy he ubsequenthetoricftheBush dministration.19n the ther and,hat ame dministrationouldwellbe the

gencyhat

elegitimizesheGWoTsecuritization.tsgigantictrategicerrorninvadingraq, ts ncompetences anoccupier,ts ppallingehaviourover orturendprisonersfwar, ndthevisible amage llthis asdoneto ts

reputationbroad ouldbeenoughodiscreditheGWoT securitizationimplyby ts ssociation ith particulardministration,venwithin heUnited tates.Thecampaignhetoricndthe utcome f the 004presidentiallection ould

suggest ot,but thecontinuingatastrophenIraq, ndthe hockingpectacleoftheUS Vice-Presidentefendingherighto torture, ight etbe enoughto turn ublic pinion. heobservationttributedo Alexis eTocquevillehat'Americasgood.And fAmericaver eases o begood,America ill ease o be

great' lays tronglynUS domesticolitics,ndpoliticianseen o beviolatingAmerica'soodnesseed owatch heir acks.

The outcome f this sagain mpossibleopredict,nd s ikelyobestronglyaffectedyhow he erroristhreatnfolds.mericans,ikemost ther itizensfdemocracies,uitewillinglyurrenderome ftheir ivil ibertiesntimesfwar.But t seasy o seethegrounds ithin mericanocietyor eactionsgainstheGWoTsecuritization,speciallyf ts egitimacyecomesontested. ne sourceofsuchreactions ouldbe civil ibertariansnd otherspposed o thereasser-tion fgovernmentowers hrough state fpermanentear ndemergency.

Another ouldbeisolationistsnd offshorealancers' hooppose he urrentlevels nd ogics f US global ngagement.Pewpollfrom ctober 005 ound42per ent fAmericansavouringmoresolationistolicy,n a steeplyisingtrendhat lreadyurpassedhehighestevelon thequestioneachedmmedi-atelyfterheVietnamWar.20here s alsoroom or similarlynformedisputeoverwhatkinds femergencyction re egitimizedytheGWoT, ncludingtreatmentfprisonersfwarakaenemy ombatants'),orture,re-emptivear,regimehangendunilateralismenerally.t willbe nterestingo seewhetherhepresentubstantialonsensusn theneed o mprovehomelandecurity',oth n

theUnited tates nd nmany ther ountries,ecomesmbeddedr s ncreas-inglyttacked. rounds or ppositionncludets osts,ntermsf bothmoneyand iberty,ndthe neffectivenessfa permanentncreasenthe tate'surveil-lance ver verythingrom radendfinanceo ndividualatternsftravelnd

consumption.he refusalfCongressn ate 005togranthe dministration'srequestor long-termxtensionf thePatriot ct, ndthepolitical ireworks

'9 PierreHassner,TheUnited tates: he mpirefforcer heforcefempire?,haillotPaper54 Paris:EuropeanUnionInstitute orSecurity tudies,2002),pp. 8-9; MelvynP. Leffler,9/11 nd thepastand future f Americanforeign olicy', nternationalffairs9: 5,2003,p.

l049.20 'Public unenthused ydemocracy ush',Pew ResearchCentre,3Feb. 2006, http://people-press.org/commen-tary/display.php3?AnalysislD=I26,ccessed18Feb. 2006.

IIo8


? 200o6 heAuthor(s).ournalompilation 2006Blackwellublishingtd/The oyal nstitutef nternationalffairs







Will heglobal ar nterrorism'ethe ewCold War?

overunauthorized overnment ire-taps n US citizens,2Ireperhapsndicativeof a growing, houghnotyetdecisive, eaction gainst hedomestic nd nterna-tional ffectsftheGWoT securitization.

A possible trawn thewind was a recent hift f rhetoric ysometopofficialsof theBush administrationn thewaythey alkabout terrorism.hey stopped

talkingbout 'globalwaron terrorism'ndbegan ousephrasesuch s a struggleagainstglobalextremism',r a 'global strugglegainst he enemiesof freedom,the enemies f civilization'. his repackagingouldbe seenas a retreat rom heGWoT securitization, ithframingsnterms f struggle' eaning owardsmore

normalized, oliticized esponses. utgiven heparallel se of longwar'rhetoric,it was more ikely n attempt o reformulatehe GWoT so as both to ustifybroader esponsendtocounter riticismsf theexcessivelymilitaryocusgener-atedbythe war'framing.22ndinanyevent, he USNSS of2006reassertedhe

'war'framing, hich eans tronglyowardsmaintaininghe ecuritization.

The egitimacyftheUS as a securitizationeaderwithinnternationalsocietyEven if the US itselfholds to the GWoT securitization, ill it be able to holdothers n a sufficientonsensus o sustain t as a dominantmacro-securitization?The answer o this uestion epends n several actors,ot east he mportancefthe erroristhreat emainingtrong nough, sdiscussedbove. talsodepends nthecredibilityndlegitimacyf theUnited States s a leaderwithinnternational

society,whichwill be thesubject f this ubsection,nd on theacceptabilitynd

legitimacy f the GWoT securitizationtself,which will be the subjectof thenext.

The US successfully enerated nd led themacro-securitizationf the ColdWaragainst ommunismenerallyndthemilitaryowerof the SovietUnion in

particular.t was aided nthis othbythebroad cceptabilityf tsownqualities sa leader ntheWest, nduptoa point ven ntheThirdWorld, ndbythefact hatother tates, speciallywestEuropeanones,plusTurkey, apan ndSouthKorea,shared hefearof communismnd Sovietmilitary ower.The GWoT has the

potential o draw ogethern evenwidergrouping, omprisingotjust hewestern

states ndJapan, utalsoothermajor tates uch sRussia,China and ndia, ll ofwhich have reasonto bandwagonwith theGWoT as a wayof addressingheirowninternalonflicts.t is, however, ardly ontroversialtthispoint oobservethat he egitimacyndacceptabilityf theUnitedStates s a leaderhavedeclined

sharply nder the stewardshipf the Bush administration.he embracing f

21'Daschle: wiretaps never discussed with Congress: former Senate Majority Leader domestic war powers were

also rejected', CNN.com, 23 Dec. 200oo5,http://www.cnn.com/20oo05/POLITICS/I12/23/domestic.spying.ap/,accessed 26 Dec. 200oo5.

22 Kim R. Holmes, 'What's in a name? "War on terror" out, "struggle against extremism" in', Heritage Foun-

dation Policy Research and Analysis, 26 July 2005, http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecu-

rity/wm8os.cfm,accessed 8 Dec.

200oo5;

Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker, 'Washington recasts terror war as

"struggle"', 7July2005,New YorkTimes s reprintedn InternationaleraldTribune, ttp://www.iht.com/articles/200oo5/o7/26/news/terror.php,ccessed8 Dec. 2005.

IIO9


? 2006 heAuthor(s).ournal ompilation 2006Blackwellublishingtd/The oyal nstitutef nternationalffairs







Barryuzan

unipolaritysa ustificationor nilateralismythatdministrationhockedndalienated any f ts llieswho hadgotused oworking ithinhemultilateralsystemargelyonstructedy heUnited tatesuringhehalf-centuryollowingthe ndof theSecondWorldWar.Withinhat eneraleactionhere ave eena wholehost fwell-rehearsedpecificisagreementsbout ssues angingromthe nternational

riminalourt, hroughhe nvironmentnd rmsontrol,othe nvasion f raq, orturendthe reatmentfprisonersfwar.Aweightfpunditrygreeshat heAtlantic asgotwider, o thepointwhere ven he deathatheres a westernommunitysnowunder erioushreat.23

There re wo inkeduestionsnplayhere: ne sabout heweakeningfUSlegitimacys nternationaleader enerally,risingromtsunilateralisturn;heother saboutwhetherheGWoT tself,rmore articularlyhe pecificay nwhich heBush dministrationasdefinedndpursuedt, s tself nderminingthe egitimacynd ttractivenessfUS leadership.hese uestionseflectets fdynamicshat re nprincipleeparate,ut which aneasily ecome inked.A

United tateshat adremainedommittedomultilateralismight aveweath-ered etterhedisagreements,articularlyhose oncerningraq, hat ave risenover heGWoT.Buta unilateralistnited tateshat asmade tselfnpopularfinds hat his npopularitynd thedisagreementsver raqbecomemutuallyreinforcing.

This ituationaisesnterestinguestionsbout he ositionftheUnited tateswithinnternationalociety,nd bout henaturef nternationalociety;nd tis these uestionshat nderpinhepotentialolitical ignificancef theGWoTsecuritization.imDunne rgueshat S unilateralismasbeen akingtoutside

internationalociety,houghe suncertainboutwhetherhismeans hatnter-nationalocietyas,neffect,hrunky osing member,rbeenpushedntomore ierarchicalormy he uzerainehaviourf tsmost owerful ember.24Kelstrupeachesclearerormulation.25e sees hat he uccessfulecuritizationoftheGWoThas reated formativeoment'n theglobalystemnwhich heUnited tatessbiddingora new trategyfgovernancenthe lobal ystem'hatrejectshe raditionalultilateralismnd avoursmore ower-basednilateralism.Such shift ouldnormally,s Dunnepartlyrguest sdoing, ake heUnitedStatesutsidenternationalociety.utKelstrup'soncernsthat successfulnddurableecuritizationf theGWoT

mightestrongnougho egitimizeshifttowardshemorehierarchicalorm finternationalocietylsopointed obyDunne, choinghewider ebate boutwhetherheUnited tatessnow typefempire.f he ombinedorce freactionsgainstS unilateralismnd ts onductof heGWoT ake toutsidenternationalociety,hen othtseadershiposition,and nternationalocietyttheglobalevel, regravely eakened.ftheGWoTsecuritizations strong noughto legitimize more hierarchicalnternational

23 Michael Cox, 'BeyondtheWest:terrorsn Transatlantia',uropeanournal f nternationalelationsI: 2, 2005,pp. 203-33.

24 Tim Dunne, 'Societyandhierarchyn international elations',nternationalelations7: 3, 2003, pp. 308, 314-I5.

2s Kelstrup, 'Globalisation', pp. 113-15.

IIIO

Internationalffairs2: 6, 2006O 200oo6he Author(s).JournalCompilation? 2006 BlackwellPublishingLtd/The Royal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Will heglobal ar n errorism'e he ew oldWar?

society,hen he United tates'eadershipositions greatlytrengthened.thirdptionsexploredyPress-Barnathan,hoargueshatnseveralmportantrespectshe lassicalnstitutionsf nternationalocietyave een trengthenedytheGWoT, espiteome ppearancesothecontrary.26hethrustfher rgumentis that heUnited tates illprobablyave odrift ack nto ine,having ad ts

unilateralistidrejected,ndnotbeingble o affordostay utside or oo ong.ItsmplicationsthatheUnited tates ill hen e n weakereadershiposition,having roadlyailed otranslatetsunquestionedower odestroynto basis f

legitimacyor more ierarchicalnternationalociety.To the xtent hat heUnited tates sunpopularpart rom heGWoT, ts

attemptouse heGWoT ecuritizationoconsolidatets ole uperpowerositioncould ncounteresistanceimplyecauset coulddo so. In otherwords,tates

mightupportroppose heGWoTnotonly nitsmerits,ut lsobecause fhow tplaysnto he lobal ierarchyfpower.27heunfoldingfeventst thetime fwritinguggesthatPress-Barnathan'sositions closest o the ikelyoutcome,houghuccessfulscalationythe erroristsouldeasily ewritehisscriptomatch elstrup'scenario.

Theunacceptabilitynd illegitimacyftheGWoTsecuritizations awhole nd/or f ssociatedparticularistecuritizations

Thedurabilityf theGWoT ecuritization,nd he bilityf theUnited tatesolead t, re lso ffectedy he xtentowhich oth heGWoT ecuritizations awhole nd/orarticularistecuritizationshat et inkedo tbecome nacceptable

and llegitimate.lthoughhegeneral WoTmacro-securitizationas nmanyrespectseenratheruccessful,thasnotgone ntirelynopposed,nd t s notdifficulto magine heredditionalines fopposition ightome rom.ofar,oppositions not o much o the eneralecuritizationtselfstothe ramingf tasa war' nd,ncreasingly,o thepracticeshat heUS trieso egitimizeithintheGWoTframe. venfthegeneralecuritizationontinuesocommand ide

support,eactiongainstt could lsogrow rom S attemptso ink o t ssuesthat re itherelated,uthotlyontestedmost bviouslysrael's wnWoT),or

hotlyontestedecausehe acts f the ink o theGWoT re hemselvesontro-

versialmost bviouslyhe nvasionf raq nthe roundsf ts lleged ossessionofWMD and ts inks oAl-Qaeda).In termsftheGWoT ecuritizations awhole, ome f heines fopposition

are he ame nthe est f theworld stheyre nUS domesticebates,articu-larly verwhatkinds femergencyction t egitimizes.o the xtent hat heGWoTbecomes ssociated ith ctions hat eem ocontradicthevalues hattheWest seeks to representgainst he ikesofAl-Q~eda, the egitimacy f thesecuritizations corroded. f the GWoT meansthatprisoners rwar are denied

26 Galia Press-Barnathan,The war against raq andinternational rder: fromBull to Bush', nternationaltudiesReview 6: 2, 2004, pp. 195-212.

27 I am gratefulo Ole Waever for hispoint.

IIII

Internationalffairs2: 6, 2o006? 2006 heAuthor(s).ournalompilation 006Blackwellublishingtd/The oyal nstitutef nternationalffairs







Barryuzan

therightsf theGenevaConventions;hat omeforms f torturere used asinterrogationechniques;hat heUnited tatesrrogateso itselfherightoattack thers ngroundsfsuspicionf inkswith errorists;hat ivil ibertiesandeconomic reedomsre restrictednthename fhomelandecurity;henmanywillthink hat heGWoTsecuritizationsdoingmoreharmhan oodto

'thecivilizedworld'.Wilkinson,hohassolid redentialss a hard oeoftheterrorists,choes sentimentidely eld cross hepolitical pectrumhenhesays hat Ifweunderminerdestroyur hard-wonibertiesndrightsn thename fsecuritygainsterrorismewillgive he erroristsvictoryheyouldneverwinbythebomb ndthegun.'28nthis espectt sof more han assinginteresthat ll ofthecurrenttrategieseingusedtopursue heGWoT seemactivelyodamagehe iberal alues hey urportodefend. shall eturnothispointnmy onclusions.

It is alsoconceivablehat heGWoT securitizationill comeunder ttackbecause fthewaynwhichtfacilitateshe inkagefreligionndpolitics. ost

westerneadersthe ver ndiplomaticerlusconiaving een notablexcep-tion)have ried ard ightrom hebeginningot o stage heGWoTas a warbetweenheWest nd slam. heyhave roddenhedifficultine fmaintainingthat, hilemost fthe erroristspeaknthename f slam,hat oesnotmeanthatmost dherentsf slam re erroristsrsupportersf terrorists.utdespitethis, heprofoundlyorryingelinkingfreligionndpoliticsntheUnitedStates,srael ndthe slamicworld asily eeds ero-sumonflicts.his inkagecouldhelp o embed he ecuritizationftheGWoT, s it seems ohavedonewithin heUnited tatesnd srael.freligiousdentitieseed hegrowthf a

'clashofcivilizations' entality,s seems o havehappenedn theepisode ftheDanish artoons,his oocouldreinforceheGWoTsecuritization.tcould,equally, reate reactiongainstt from hosewho feel hat heir articularreligionsbeingmisrepresentedy undamentalists,nd/orromhosewhoobjecttoreligiousnfluencenpolitics.he atterscertainlyart fwhat aswidenedthegapbetweenheUS andEurope.

Another eakness ftheGWoTmacro-securitizations thatAl-Qaeda ndits ike,while learly osing threat o theWest, o notrepresentplausiblepoliticallternativeo t, slamistantasiesbout new aliphateotwithstanding.The

contrast ith heColdWar ouldnot emore triking.hen, he esignatedopponentndobject fsecuritizationas power hat epresentedhat eemedaplausible oliticallternative:necould asilymaginecommunistorld. hepost-9/IIecuritizationocused eithern analternativeuperpoweroron analternativedeology,ut nthe haos ower f embitterednd lienated inori-ties, longwith handfulfpariah overnments,ndtheirbilityoexploit heopenness, hetechnology,nd n someplacesthe nequality, nfairnessnd failedstatesgenerated ythewestern ystem fpolitical conomy.While serious, heterroristhreateems o lackthedepth ftheSoviet/communistne. It thereforehas shallowroots, nd couldwellbeharder o sustain.

28 Wilkinson, International errorism,p. I7-I8, 24-5.

III2

Internationalffairs2: 6, 2006? 200o6 he Author(s).JournalCompilation? 2006 BlackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Will heglobal ar nterrorism'e he ewColdWar?

In additionto thegeneralvulnerabilitiesf the GWoT securitization,here

is theproblem f controversialecuritizationinkages eingmadeto it. Likethe

problem f GWoT-legitimizedctions hatgo againstwestern alues,contested

linked ecuritizationslso threatenhe egitimacynd attractivenessf thewider

securitization.he mostobvious,widespread nddeepest ispute fthiskindhas

beenover he nvasion f raq.TheUS andBritish overnmentsttemptedojustifythe nvasionby linking addamHussein'sregime o both terroristsnd WMD.

This securitizingmovewas successful ithin he UnitedStates, utvigorouslycontestednmany ther laces, esultingnserious nddamaging plitsn both he

EU andNATO. Russiawasgenerallyery upportivef theGWoT securitization,

seeking o link ts own difficultiesn Chechnya o it,but Putin oined Germanyand France n strong pposition o the US-led invasion f Iraq.The ill-prepared

occupation hatfollowed he successful litzkrieg gainstraqonlydeepened he

splits,withmany pponents fthewaragreeingwithDana Allin's ssessmenthat

'Iraq was probably hewarthatbinLaden wantedthe UnitedStates o fight',29and Wilkinson's hat twas a gratuitousropaganda ift obin Laden'.30 uringthe2004US election, venJohnKerry eganto arguethepointthat nvasion f

Iraqwasdistractingffortwayfrom he GWoT.3' As thepoliticaldisasternIraqcontinues ounfold,t s hard oavoidthe onclusion hattwas both tactical nd

strategiclunder fepicproportionsnrelationo theproblem fglobal errorism

representedyAl-Qaeda. The steady lowof badnewsfromraq,andthe ackof

soundoptionsfor ither tayingn orgetting ut,corrodes he egitimacyf the

GWoT securitizationyassociatingt with baddecisions ndunsuccessful,ven

counterproductive,ctions.Whether his ypeofassociationssufficientobring

downtheGWoT securitizations an interestinguestion. f the VietnamWar staken s ananalogy, hen he nswersprobably o. Vietnamweakened heUnited

Statesbecause,probably ike raq, t cameto be seenbothas a mistake nd as a

defeat.But it did notmuchdamagethe widermacro-securitizationf the Cold

War,despite eingclosely inked o it.Somewhatdifferentromraq,butsimilarncreatingension verthebroader

GWoT securitization,as srael's ttempto link tsown waragainst heArabs o

America'sGWoT. Thismovewaslargely uccessfulntheUnitedStates,where t

increasedhe lready trong S tilt owardssrael, nd argely ejected verywhere

else where srael's roblemswere seento be largelyf tsown

makingecauseof

its xpansionistettlementolicy).Like the nvasion f raq,this articularecuri-

tizationdividedthe UnitedStatesfrommanyof its allies n theGWoT, and so

weakenedthe consensus n theoverall ecuritizationf theGWoT. This typeoflinkage trengthenedhe view that he GWoT representsot ust a legitimate

response o a genuine hreat,ut alsoa manoeuvre ytheBushadministrationo

manipulatehe9/II trauma o create climate ffearwhichcouldhelp tachieve

theradicalpoliticalgoalswhich tbroughtwith t to office. he attacks f 9/11

29 Dana H. Allin, The Atlantic risis f confidence',nternationalffairs0: 4, 2004, p. 652.30 Wilkinson, nternationalerrorism,. 21.

3' 'Bush, Kerry lashon Iraq war',Chicago un Times, 0 Sept. 2004,http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/osbush.html#,ccessed 6 Dec. 2005.

III3


? 200oo6he Author(s).JournalCompilation? 200oo6lackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Barryuzan

offeredhe ush dministrationot nly huge pportunityopursuets omestic

agendawithinheUnited tates,ut lso, s tthought,nopportunityoremaketheworld.32o the xtent hat inks o raq nd srael einforceheview hat heGWoT s ust plot n the art f theBush dministration,he egitimacyf theGWoT ecuritizationillbeeroded.

Thepotencyf ecuritizationsompeting ith heGWoT

Thefinal bviousype f hreato he urabilityf heGWoT ecuritizationsthatitwillbeovertakeny competingecuritizationndpushednto he ackground.Justs theGWoTpushedther oncernsnto hebackgroundfter/II, o too t

might e subordinatedo more pparentlyrgentoncerns. ecall lsothat heenvironmentor heGWoT ecuritizationasparticularlyropitious,iven hattheUnited tates adbeen astingbout uringmuch fthe ecade ollowingheend ftheCold War or ome ew hreatround hich oorganizets oreignnd

securityolicies. heGWoT hadnostronghallengersndwas thereforeasilyable ofill he acuum.

There re uite varietyfpossibleandidatesor ompetingecuritizations.

Rising ea evels rapproachingsteroids,rthe preadf a newkiller lague,couldeasily utplanetarynvironmentaloncernst thetopof the ecuritiza-tion genda. ut nconventional odethemost ikely hreat o theGWoT asdominant acro-securitizationomes romhe ise fChina. hat heGWoTdidnot liminatether,more raditionallytate-centric,S securitizationss shown

by he 002Nationalecuritytrategy,hich ointedlyeassertedheUS inten-

tion o retainmilitaryuperiorityver ll others:We must uild ndmaintainour defenseseyondhallenge.. Our forces illbestrongnough o dissuade

potentialdversariesromursuingmilitaryuild-upnhopes fsurpassing,requaling,he ower f heUnitedStates.'33he dea fChina isingo uperpowerstatusndbecoming peer ompetitoro theUnited tates asbeen trongn theUS since he ndoftheColdWar,34ndthe mpiricalaseforChina chievingsuperpowerapabilitiesithin henext ouple f decades splausible.35t was

perhapsnly heperceivedemotenessntime f China chievinguperpowerstatus hat reventedhis ecuritizationromecominghedominanthetoricn

Washingtonuringhe

99os.stimemarches

n,he ise fChina ecomesmore

real nd esshypothetical.

32 Ivo H. Daalder ndJamesM. Lindsay,mericanbound:he ush evolutionnforeignolicyWashingtonC:Brookingsnstitutionress,003), p.78-97.

33Bush, heNationalecuritytrategy,p.29-30.34Richard .Betts,Wealth,owernd nstability:astAsia nd heUnited tates fterheColdWar',nterna-

tional ecurity8:3, 1993/4, P. 34-77; ThomasJ.Christensen,Posing problemswithout atching p: China'srise nd challengeforUS security olicy', nternationalecurity5: 4, 200oo1,p. 5-40; AdamWard, China andAmerica: troubleahead?', Survival 5: 3, 200oo3, p. 35-56; Robert S. Ross, 'The geography f peace: EastAsia in thetwenty-firstentury',nternationalecurity3: 4, 1999,pp. 81-118; Denny Roy, 'Hegemon on thehorizon?China's threat oEast Asiansecurity',nternationalecurity9: I, 1994, p. 149-68;David Shambaugh,'Containmentor engagement f China?Calculating Beijing'sresponses',nternationalecurity1: 2, 1996,pp.18o-209.

3 BarryBuzan, TheUnited tates ndthe reat owersCambridge: Polity, 004).

1114

Internationalffairs2: 6, 200oo6? 2006 The Author(s).JournalCompilation ? 2006 BlackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs








Given n ongoing isposition ithinWashingtono construct hinaas athreat,he ikelyncreasenChinese ower, oth elativendabsolute,nd theexistenceftensionsetweenhe wogovernmentsver,nterlia,Taiwan,radeandhuman ights,t snotdifficulto magineircumstancesnwhich oncernsabout hinawould ecome he ominantecuritizationithin heUnited tates.

Certainlyuch securitizationould t east npart estorehe arallelotheColdWar,nasmuchs China s apotentialuperpowerlausiblyapable fbecominga challengerotheUnited tates' elf-understoodnipolartatus. heChinese

governments alsoauthoritarian,houghheres no longernyparallelo the

ideological ompetitionetween heUnited tates ndtheSovietUnion.Whatis interestingere s that t s theUnited tates hats most ikely o be influ-enced ythis ompetingecuritization.hould his cenarionfold,twouldofcoursempact tronglyn theroleof theUnited tates s leader f theGWoTsecuritization.hetwo renot ikelyomerge ecause hinahas no interestn

supportingslamic errorists.t s alsoentirelyossiblehatfcompetitionith

China ecomeshedominantecuritizationor heUnited tates,his ecuritiza-tionwill have ittleppeal r use as a macro-securitizationoaudiencesutsidetheUnited tates.ndeed,olong s China onductsts o-calledpeacefulise'insuch way s not othreatentsneighboursrthegeneraltabilityf nterna-tionalociety, anyutsideheUnited tatesmightctually elcomet.Europeis likely obe indifferent,ndmany ountriese.g.Russia,China, ndia, ran,France,Malaysia)upport rhetoricfmultipolaritys their referredowerstructurever he redominanceftheUnited tatesssole uperpower.fplayedcleverly,hina's isemighteem hreateningnlyo theUnited tates,ndnot o

most ther ountries.fso, uch risemight ellweaken heGWoT as a macro-securitizationy oweringt nUSpriorities,hile ot eplacingtwith ny thermacro-securitization.nly fChinarises nsuch way s tothreatentsneigh-bourswould tprovidehebasis or securitizationhat heUnited tates ouldshare ith thers.

Insum,he urabilityf heGWoT samacro-securitizationooks uite oubtful.

Althoughutcomes or ach f the actorsbove redifficultopredict ith nycertainty,heGWoT macro-securitizations vulnerableobeing erailedfany

one of them eases o besupportivef t na majorway. notherwords,very-thing as ogo rightf theGWoT sto nherithemantleftheColdWar.Thiscould, fcourse, appen, speciallyftheterroristsucceednescalatingheirattacks. utgivenhenumberfthingshat ouldplausiblyowrong ort, hechance hat heGWoT ecuritizationill ndure oesnot ook llthattrong.

Conclusions

To conclude, want tofocus n the contradiction etweenpursuit f the GWoTmacro-securitizationnd maintenance f both domestic nd internationalolit-ical and especially) conomic rders ased on liberal alues.The argumentsthat

Internationalffairs2: 6, 2006? 200oo6he Author(s).JournalCompilation? 2006 BlackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Barryuzan

pursuitftheGWoT nevitablyeneratesrofoundlyifficulthoices oriberalsocietiesetweenffectiveounterterrorismolicies ntheonehand ndquitefundamentalompromisingfthe rinciplesf he iberal rdernthe ther. hisdilemmasmademore oignanty he act hat errorisms the ark, ncivil,ideof iberalism'such rizediberationnd ultivationf domesticndglobal ivil

societys an antidoteo excessesf state

ower.he GWoT s

mainlybout he

state ersusncivilociety.his sthe raditionalormftheHobbesiannsecurityagenda, here he tate rotectsts itizensgainstachother ycreatinglegalframework,ndenforcingmonopolyflegitimateiolence gainst arlords,terrorists,rganizedrimendwhateverncivillementseek odisrupthe eaceordeploy orcegainsthe itizenryor rivatends.But under lobalizationwiderdimensionets dded.The opennessf a liberalizedconomy rovidesopportunitiesor ransnationalriminalsndterroristsndextremistsf allsortstooperaten aglobalcale.As a consequence,he raditionalobbesianomestic

securitygenda ets ushed pto thenternationalevel. ecause world overn-mentsnot vailable,he roblemitsnternationalocietygainstlobal ncivilsociety. n additionalifficulty,s Wilkinsonotes,s thatAl-Qaeda nd ts lkhave uchprofoundlyevolutionistbjectiveshat negotiatedolutions not

reallynoption.36umsfeldsquite ighthathe truggles to thedeath.The dilemmarises ut of thepolicy hoices acedbyliberal ocietiesn

respondingo terrorism.he three ptions urrentlyn playall requirehatterrorisme securitizednd mergencyction f ome ort akenotryocounterand liminatet. n each ase, henecessaryction equireseriousompromisingof iberalalues.

Insulation

Insulationsexemplifiedyhomelandecurityndhardeninghe tateothgainstpenetrationyterroristsndagainstulnerabilityf infrastructureo terroristattack.ursuingheogic fhomelandecurityuicklyeginsoundermineomecore lementsfthe IEO.Thefreemovementfpeople or urposesfbusiness,educationnd he rts srestrictedytighterontrolsntravelnd mmigration.The freemovementfgoods s restrictedothby ncreasedequirementsor

inspectionnd

raceability,nd

byhe

mpositionfmore ontrolsnthe

xportoftechnologyelated oWMD. The freemovementfmoneysrestrictedythemeasuresaken odisrupthefinancialetworksf terrorists.yhardeningborders,omelandecurity easuresrode ome f theprinciplesfeconomicliberalismhatheyredesignedodefend;nd he ame rgumentould e madeabout he rade-offetweennhancedurveillancender heGWoT nd he ivil

libertieshat repart fthe orereferentbject f westernivilization.37tvarious

points nsulation lends ntothenextoption:repression.

36 Wilkinson, nternationalerrorism,p. 133-16.

37JefHuysmans, Mindingexceptions:thepoliticsof insecurity nd liberaldemocracy',Contemporaryolitical

Theory: 3, 200oo4,p. 32I1-4I. See also StephenGill, The globalpanopticon:theneoliberal tate, conomic ifeand democratic surveillance', Alternatives o: I, 1995, pp. 1-49.

1116

Internationalffairs2: 6, 2o006O oo6 The Author(s).JournalCompilation ? 200o6 lackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs








Repression

Repressions about arryinghefighto theterroristsn anattempto elimi-nate hem ypolice nd/or ilitaryction.t s the harpndoftheGWoT, ndinvolveswide pectrumf activitiesrom,toneextreme,akingownwholestatese.g.Afghanistan,raq), hroughustainedccupationse.g. srael n the

West ank ndGaza)andmilitaryearchesor nd ssaultsn terroristasese.g.inPakistan,ost-Talebanfghanistan,hePhilippines),o, t the therxtreme,targetedssassinationse.g. sraeliolicy gainst amas nd he LA) nd rbitraryarrestsnddetentionstheUSextra-legalulagnGuantinamoay nd lsewhere)of ndividuals. ar s seldom oodforiberal alues venwhen oughtndefenceof them. t underminesivil iberties,eace, he pennesshat heLIEO requiresand, s US practicehows,he ommitmento human ights.

EqualizingEqualizingtartsromhe ssumptionhat he oot auses f terrorismie nthe

inequalitiesnd njusticeshat reboth legacy f human istorynd a featureofmarketconomies. he ong-termolution o terrorismnthis erspectivesto drainhewatersnwhich he erroristswim yredressinghenequalitiesnd

injusticeshatupposedlyenerateupportor hem.t s notmy oncernere o

arguewhetherhis ontestedause-effectypothesisscorrectrnot.My pointis thatfa policy long heseines spursued,t cannot voidundermininghefoundationsf competitivearketconomy.edistributionnthe cale equiredwould

putpoliticalrioritieshead fmarket

ogics,nd n

doingoquench

hefiresfthemarket hich uel he iberalroject. possibleiberal ountero thisview sthat liberal olicywouldbenot o much edistributivesameliorative,makinghe iberalystemork ettery, or xample, liminatingich ountryprotectionismn griculture.owever, hile hismighteducenequalitiesnthe

veryong un,nthe hortndmedium ermt s ikelyocausehuge mountsf

painas nthe ecenthiftn he extileegime, hich nabled hina odrivemanyThirdWorld roducersutofthemarket).f nequalitys the ourcefterrorism,neo-liberalconomicsoesnotprovide quick nougholution.

It thus ecomes lear hat errorismoses double hreat o liberal emocraticsocieties:pendirect ssaults f the ype hat avebecome ll toofamiliar,ndinsidiousrosions a consequencefthe ountermeasuresaken.t seasy oseehow his ilemma rivesome owardseekingsolutionntotal ictoryhatwilleliminateoth he erroristsnd he ontradiction.ut f t s mpossibleo elimi-nateterrorists,s isprobably hecase,then hisdrive isks hekindofpermanentmobilization hat nevitablyorrodes iberal racticesndvalues.

If theprioritys to preserveiberalvalues,one is pushedtowards heoptionof learning o live with terrorisms an everyday iskwhilepursuing ounter-

measureshat top hort fcreating garrisontate. his choice s not tosecuritize

1117


? 200oo6he Author(s).JournalCompilation ? 200oo6lackwellPublishingLtd/TheRoyal Institute f InternationalAffairs







Barryuzan

terrorism,ut nsteado maketpart f normalolitics. akinghis oute voidsa contradictionetweenounterterroristoliciesnd iberalalues. henecessarycondition or oing o is that tate ndsocietyaise heir olerationor amageas a price hey ayfor pennessndfreedom.ennethWaltz ong gomade he

point hatif freedomswanted,nsecurityust eaccepted',38hought hastobesaid hat his

artf his

nalysisasmade ittle

mpactn US

thinkingbout

nationalecurity.39his snot osay hat nderhis olicy othing ould edoneto countererrorism;utthe ountermovesould top hort fdeclaring arand/or state fsiege. errorismouldbe treatedike rafficccidents: struc-tural roblemealtwith hroughormalolitics,espitehe uite arge umberof deathsnd njuriesnvolved. itizenswouldhave oaccept herisk fbeingkilled r njuredy erroristsnthe ameway hathey ccepthe isk faccidentwhen heynterhe ransportystem.nprinciple,hishould epossible-trans-port ccidentsill armore eople han erroristso-thoughwhetherny ormofpolity,ndespeciallydemocraticne, ould npracticeustaint san nter-

estingnddifficultuestion.erhaps, ith rave, onest,harismaticnddeter-minedeadership,t ould edone.But heseualitiesrenot bundantnpoliticallife,ndtheres a question hetheruch policy ouldorshould e sustainedifterroristiolence scalatedeyondurrentevels. hort fsuch scalation,

strategylong heseines hould epossible. ut fterrorisms a problemfthe

long erm,s twellmightefor dvancedndustrialocieties,twould equirelevel f democraticophisticationndcommitmentatherigherhan nythingyet een.

Ifthis stheway ogo,then urope,which asalreadyearned o livewith

a degree f terrorisms normal olitics,mayhavemuchmore oofferhan heUnited tates, hich s driven ymuchhigher emandsornationalecurity.Robert agan ad pointwhen enoted hatheUS andEuropeanositionsn heworldwere eterminedy heirespectiveower ndweakness.40ut nrelationto theGWoT, nd thedefencef iberal alues, hepositionsmaybe reversed.

Europesmore esilientndbetterble o defendtsvalueswithoutesortingoexcessesf securitization.ycomparison,heUnited tateseems softerarget,tooeasily rickednto ntemperateeactionshatn themselvesork o under-minewhat tclaimsostand or.

3s KennethN. Waltz,TheoryfinternationalpoliticsReading,MA: Addison-Wesley,979),p. 112.

39 Buzan, The United tatesndthe reat owers,p. 172-3.4o RobertKagan, Paradisendpower: mericandEuropen the ewworld rderLondon: AtlanticBooks, 2003).

III8

Internationalffairs2: 6, zoo6

? 2006TheAuthor(s).ournalompilation zoo6Blackwellublishingtd/The oyal nstitutef nternationalffairs

2006 will the 'global war on terrorism' be the new cold war

Documents