Authoritarian Africa beyond Guantánamo: Freedom in Captivity

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 411-416
Author(s):  
Erin Pettigrew

Africanists struggle with Mohamedou ould Slahi’s story for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that the Saharan region is often considered a space betwixt and between. Not only does the Sahara lie between the Maghreb and the Sahel, but Slahi’s experience illustrates how the military and political histories of counterterrorism and the intellectual and social histories of Islamist calls for religious reform are imagined as occurring elsewhere. The upswing in violence in Burkina Faso and Mali, the continued disruptions of Boko Haram, and the deep military involvement and investments in the Sahara remind us that the African continent has been an important site in the global war on terror (Thurston 2017). American and European foreign assistance, often in the form of military aid, has helped expand the surveillance capacities of African states, especially after 2001. In the case of Mauritania, American counterterrorism funds contributed to the consolidation of power in the authoritarian regime of Maaouya Ould Sid'Ahmed Taya, who ruled from 1984 to 2005, while the Mauritanian government ignored demands for democratization from its own citizens and instead pursued repressive policies that accused political opponents of Islamist activity, limiting their freedom of expression (Jourde 2007). Slahi’s story, then, can be seen as part of a much longer history of foreign incursion and neocolonial intrusion into African affairs, as the war on terror has led to a similar bolstering of authoritarian governments, an influx of military aid and funds that encourage corruption, and worrisome increases in weapons at the expense of other needed projects and investment, as happened during the Cold War (Schmidt 2013). Rather than promote economic development and democracy, these policies undermine Africa’s future.

2021 ◽  
pp. 153-181
Author(s):  
Banu Karaca

Chapter 5 traces how art deemed outside of the state’s civilizing discourse is met with censorship. It expands the definition of censorship beyond explicit bans and suppressions of artworks by the state, as such bans have become technically speaking difficult to enforce and somewhat unnecessary. Instead, it highlights processes of (partial) silencing, including incentives for self-censorship and delegitimization as well as modes of foreclosure that authoritatively frame the production and reception of art. At the center of the chapter are the attempts to censor the exhibitions Regarding Terror, thematizing media perceptions of the Red Army Faction (Berlin, 2005), and Freekick (Istanbul, 2005), mainly featuring works on the “Kurdish question” and other instances of state violence. Under the shadow of the “global war on terror” and each country’s historical challenges with “security politics,” critics of both exhibitions construed arts and politics as incommensurable. Outlining how freedom of expression is circumscribed by official memory regimes in Turkey and Germany, the chapter analyzes different modes of censorship and the variety of actors engaged in it. It highlights that silencing efforts use the argument of the autonomy of art not to shield art from political intervention but to suppress political expression through the arts.


2005 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colm Campbell

The hegemonic position of the United States, and its implication for international law, are rapidly emerging as sites of intense scholarly interest.1It is a truism that the fall of the Berlin wall has been followed by a period of unprecedented American predominance in the military, economic, and political spheres. Replacing the bi-polar certainties of the Cold War is a world in flux, dominated, to a significant extent, by one remaining superpower, or, in the words of the former French Foreign Minister, Hubert Vedrine, by a ‘hyperpower’.2Some though, have emphasised the continuing importance of other loci of (lesser) power in a ‘uni-multipolar’ world.3That this domination posed critical questions for international law was obvious well before the 9/11 atrocities, as the debate over NATO's use of force in Kosovo illustrated. Since the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and with the global ‘war on terror’ reaching into ever-increasing spheres, the debate has intensified significantly.


2019 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Xiaobing Li

The introduction provides an outline of the book by answering four questions. The first question addresses China’s intention, strategy, and defense policy toward Vietnam in 1950. The study seeks to elucidate the origins of and changes to Chinese strategy by examining how the PRC defense policy evolved in the 1950s. The second question relates to China’s commitment to and the capacity of its military aid to Vietnam in 1950–1965, when China faced its own serious economic difficulties. The third question concerns aspects of Sino-Vietnamese military relations, including cooperation, negotiation, and conflict. China’s strategic culture can be better understood beyond the history of the Cold War since it is deeply rooted in the past. The fourth question is about current literature on the topic and sources used in the book. Due to a lack of readily available sources for Western researchers, few areas in international military history pose more difficulties than a study of Communist foreign assistance. This volume is supported by Chinese primary and secondary sources made available only in recent years.


2009 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rune Ottosen

Abstract The historical roots of the technology and design of computer games can be found in Pentagon-supported research in 1960s. Many computer games had their origin as simulators and training equipment for the armed forces. It can be argued that the content of computer games concerning real wars reflects the ideological interest of the military-industrial complex or the military-entertainment complex, as Robin Andersen has redefined it. Selected games such as ’America’s Army’, ‘Army of Two’’ and companies such as ‘Kuma War’ are analysed critically within the framework of the fight for ideological hegemony in the Global War on Terror. It is argued that when computer game are read as text, they can also be read as propaganda.


2008 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 581-600 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN WILLIAMS

AbstractThis article contributes to current debates about Just War by analysing an insufficiently recognised problem with the way Just War theorists have responded to the two principal challenges surrounding the ethics of violence in international relations since the end of the Cold War – humanitarian intervention and the ‘global war on terror’. The problem focuses on strongly embedded assumptions that exist in contemporary Just War debates about the nature and meaning of territory. The article argues that Just War needs to engage more systematically with challenges to dominant ‘Westphalian’ framings of territory, space and scale in order to contribute more effectively to important ethical debates about the use of violence in international relations.


2014 ◽  
Vol 40 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 431-438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faisal Devji

One of the consequences of Al-Qaeda’s terrorism has been its blurring of the distinction between national and international politics, both of which have lost a great deal of their former autonomy by serving as hosts for a set of new global concerns and practices. The Global War on Terror can be seen as an effort to externalize Al-Qaeda’s global threat by internationalizing it in a conventional war, and thus reinforcing both the autonomy of international politics and its separation from that of a national variety. More than a conservative move to protect the international order, however, the War on Terror was also an ambitious attempt to remake global politics in the wake of the Cold War. But despite the transformations it has wrought, the War on Terror failed to create either a new global order or even a new global politics.


2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Candice A. Alfano ◽  
Jessica Balderas ◽  
Simon Lau ◽  
Brian E. Bunnell ◽  
Deborah C. Beidel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document