scholarly journals Secrecy's subjects: Special operators in the US shadow war

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 386-414
Author(s):  
Elspeth Van Veeren

AbstractThis article sets out a framework for studying the power of secrecy in security discourses. To date, the interplay between secrecy and security has been explored within security studies most often through a framing of secrecy and security as a ‘balancing’ act, where secrecy and revelation are binary opposites, and excesses of either produce insecurity. Increasingly, however, the co-constitutive relationship between secrecy and security is the subject of scholarly explorations. Drawing on ‘secrecy studies’, using the US ‘shadow war’ as an empirical case study, and conducting a close reading of a set of key memoirs associated with the rising practice of ‘manhunting’ in the Global War on Terrorism (GWoT), this article makes the case that to understand the complex workings of power within a security discourse, the political work of secrecy as a multilayered composition of practices (geospatial, technical, cultural, and spectacular) needs to be analysed. In particular, these layers result in the production and centring of several secrecy subjects that help to reproduce the logic of the GWoT and the hierarchies of gender, race, and sex within and beyond special operator communities (‘insider’, ‘stealthy’, ‘quiet’, and ‘alluring’ subjects) as essential to the security discourse of the US ‘shadow war’.

Lung ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Lewin-Smith ◽  
Adriana Martinez ◽  
Daniel I. Brooks ◽  
Teri J. Franks

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 1721-1749 ◽  
Author(s):  
ELSPETH VAN VEEREN

AbstractIn January 2002, images of the detention of prisoners held at US Naval Station Guantanamo Bay as part of the Global War on Terrorism were released by the US Department of Defense, a public relations move that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld later referred to as ‘probably unfortunate’. These images, widely reproduced in the media, quickly came to symbolise the facility and the practices at work there. Nine years on, the images of orange-clad ‘detainees’ – the ‘orange series’ – remain a powerful symbol of US military practices and play a significant role in the resistance to the site. However, as the site has evolved, so too has its visual representation. Official images of these new facilities not only document this evolution but work to constitute, through a careful (re)framing (literal and figurative), a new (re)presentation of the site, and therefore the identities of those involved. The new series of images not only (re)inscribes the identities of detainees as dangerous but, more importantly, work to constitute the US State as humane and modern. These images are part of a broader effort by the US administration to resituate its image, and remind us, as IR scholars, to look at the diverse set of practices (beyond simply spoken language) to understand the complexity of international politics.


2019 ◽  
pp. 119-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
James H. Lebovic

With the September 11, 2001 attack by al-Qaeda terrorists on the World Trade Center, the Bush administration conceded to decisional bias. It committed to Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan without duly assessing the implications of a Taliban defeat or how it might serve the administration’s “global war on terrorism.” Once engaged, the administration defined the US mission in Afghanistan broadly yet remained detached from harsh realities—including Afghan government corruption and ineptitude, finite alliance resources (in the International Security Assistance Force), and a Taliban resurgence—that hampered the achievement of these goals. The Obama administration capped US involvement in pursuing the limited goal of “reversing” the Taliban’s momentum. Although the administration increased US force levels in Afghanistan, it did so modestly and temporarily and then pursued a troop exit despite the country’s ongoing violence and instability. The administration stuck to its plan, slowing, not reversing, the withdrawal as the country’s security conditions worsened.


Author(s):  
Tony Smith

This chapter examines the United States' liberal democratic internationalism from George W. Bush to Barack Obama. It first considers the Bush administration's self-ordained mission to win the “global war on terrorism” by reconstructing the Middle East and Afghanistan before discussing the two time-honored notions of Wilsonianism espoused by Democrats to make sure that the United States remained the leader in world affairs: multilateralism and nation-building. It then explores the liberal agenda under Obama, whose first months in office seemed to herald a break with neoliberalism, and his apparent disinterest in the rhetoric of democratic peace theory, along with his discourse on the subject of an American “responsibility to protect” through the promotion of democracy abroad. The chapter also analyzes the Obama administration's economic globalization and concludes by comparing the liberal internationalism of Bush and Obama.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document