Foreign and security policy have long been removed from the political pressures that influence other areas of policymaking. This has led to a tendency to separate the analytical levels of the individual and the collective. Using Lacanian theory, which views the subject as ontologically incomplete and desiring a perfect identity which is realised in fantasies, or narrative scenarios, this book shows that the making of foreign policy is a much more complex process. Emotions and affect play an important role, even where ‘hard’ security issues, such as the use of military force, are concerned. Eberle constructs a new theoretical framework for analysing foreign policy by capturing the interweaving of both discursive and affective aspects in policymaking. He uses this framework to explain Germany’s often contradictory foreign policy towards the Iraq crisis of 2002/2003, and the emotional, even existential, public debate that accompanied it. This book adds to ongoing theoretical debates in International Political Sociology and Critical Security Studies and will be required reading for all scholars working in these areas.

This book provides a critical realist analysis of Turkish foreign policy (TFP), covering various periods from the Turkish National Struggle to the contemporary Justice and Development Party Government. It discusses TFP within the critical realist framework, employing the concept of differences in continuity to demonstrate how agency and structure interacted, and how some discourses arose and others failed in the history of the Turkish Republic. The book also applies the concepts of strategy and strategic discourse to reveal how real-world strategic preferences correspond to the narration. Lastly, the author argues that the underlying structural forces have endured, despite Turkey’s persistence in enhancing the agency’s role, ultimately leading to differentiation between “what is spoken” and “what is actualized”.

This text reviews a variety of approaches to the study of the European Union's foreign policy. Much analysis of EU foreign policy contains implicit theoretical assumptions about the nature of the EU and its member states, their inter-relationships, the international system in which they operate and the nature and direction of European integration. In many instances such assumptions, given that they are not discussed openly, curtail rather than facilitate debate. The purpose of this book is to open up this field of enquiry so that students, observers and analysts of EU foreign policy can review a broad range of tools and theoretical templates from which the development and the trajectory of the EU's foreign policy can be studied.

Foreign and security policy have long been removed from the political pressures that influence other areas of policymaking. This has led to a tendency to separate the analytical levels of the individual and the collective. Using Lacanian theory, which views the subject as ontologically incomplete and desiring a perfect identity which is realised in fantasies, or narrative scenarios, this book shows that the making of foreign policy is a much more complex process. Emotions and affect play an important role, even where ‘hard’ security issues, such as the use of military force, are concerned. Eberle constructs a new theoretical framework for analysing foreign policy by capturing the interweaving of both discursive and affective aspects in policymaking. He uses this framework to explain Germany’s often contradictory foreign policy towards the Iraq crisis of 2002/2003, and the emotional, even existential, public debate that accompanied it. This book adds to ongoing theoretical debates in International Political Sociology and Critical Security Studies and will be required reading for all scholars working in these areas.

This volume considers the role of rhetoric and discourse in policy through the eyes of foreign policymakers. Its contributors include Louis J. Halle, I. M. Destler, Philip Odeen, James R. Schlesinger, and Dean Rusk. It illuminates the role and the limits of political rhetoric in foreign policy.

An intriguing look at the role of affect, identity, and discourse in world politics and in the context of recent U.S. foreign policy

The goal of this book is to examine some of the major foreign policy debates in the United Kingdom and the United States in the period from 1992 to 2008: from the end of the Cold War and the aftermath of the first Gulf War to the 2008 American presidential election. The first President Bush spoke in 1991 of a “new world order” – which seemed to mean an American hegemony. The United States was now the world’s only superpower, although a superpower afflicted with weaknesses, especially economic ones. But by 2008 the “new world order” did not seem so new or so strongly American. The period saw the terrorist attacks against the U.S. of 11 September 2001, military problems for the superpower in Afghanistan and Iraq and, by the summer of 2008, near economic collapse. In all of these developments, Britain shared to a lesser or a greater extent. It is hoped that this book will shed an important light both on each nation and on the so-called “special relationship” between the two. Furthermore, this book is also not specifically concerned with policy or how policy is made but with the debate around policy and the rhetoric used to present different points of view. “The ‘Special Relationship’ between the US and Britain remains an enigmatic, ever-changing, but still very powerful factor in world politics. As an examination of their foreign policy discourses reveals, from the perspective of culture and values, few Western countries are as different as the United Kingdom and the US. With very few exceptions – the foreign policies of Gladstone and Tony Blair, and Chruchillian rhetoric, unmatched by his supremely realpolitical politics – British governments abhor talking about values and ideals. The British cultural peculiarity is to dismiss ideology and values as packaging, only to be caught by surprise time and again that they cannot do “business with Herr Hitler”, or that people kill each other for their values, religions, constructed identities and ideologies. Most American governments, by contrast, have had ideological and moral crusades embroidered on their banners in their foreign policy. There is a convergence with Britain when both proclaim that all they are doing is in their self-interest, but the Americans unashamedly assume that what is good for America is good for the world, while the British discourse, with the UK’s decline since 1945, rarely goes that far. As an analysis of their discourses reveals, the ‘Special Relationship’ is thus clearly founded on something either deeper or more superficial than shared culture or values; this volume sheds light on this surprising fact in most illuminating ways, and Lori Maguire’s achievement in bringing together these examinations is praiseworthy indeed.” —Prof. Beatrice Heuser, University of Reading