The Discourse of Fear: Effects of the War on Terror on Canadian University Students

This multimethod study is based on written narratives, demographic questionnaires, and interviews. I examine data collected from 99 students of a Canadian university to explore how the War on Terror has affected them. The findings are divided into four categories. The first category of the respondents is mute about the war’s effects. The second shows a disjuncture between the respondents’ lives and the war. The third reflects the effects on the Canadian soldiers’ friends or relatives, and the final represents those who do not have personal connections to the war but feel deeply affected by it. The discourse of fear appears as the most prominent effect in the narratives of the respondents. The basic themes that emerged from the discourse of fear (racism, Islamophobia, and social control) are then developed and discussed as they pertain to the respondents. The findings have many implications for both researchers and educators.     

海湾战争与土耳其中东外交政策评析

20世纪40年代以来土耳其奉行亲西方,尤其是亲美的一边倒外交政策,土耳其中东外交服务于其西方战略,长期以中立和不介入为主要特征。20世纪90年代世界政治格局的变化使得土耳其必须重新调整其中东外交政策,海湾战争为土耳其重新实践其外交政策提供了机遇,土耳其在中东开始采取积极、主动的新型外交政策。海湾战争成为土耳其中东外交的分水岭。海湾战争中,土耳其积极介入中东事务的政策与土耳其亲西方的外交政策恰好吻合;伊拉克战争则表明土耳其中东外交与其亲西方外交之间的不协调性。     

Anthropology of law,fear, and the War on Terror

Since 9/11, the US government has arrested hundreds of people, mainly American Muslims and Middle Easterners. Such arrests grow out of control and accusations become the same as guilt. Mob mentality becomes a state of mind, a sociopolitical phenomenon that periodically erupts, fuelled by right‐wing Christian religious extremists and frequent malicious government prosecutions. A key characteristic of interest to anthropologists who study law is that the accused is presumed guilty without due process.     

Reinhold Niebuhr and the US War on Terror: A Response to Dr Gilkey

Abstract

Building upon Langdon Gilkey's reflection on Reinhold Niebuhr's Moral Man and Immoral Society, this article examines Niebuhr's enduring contribution in relation to two pressing international concerns: religious terrorism and the US War on Terror. As these two issues are characterized by their suppression of reason, I argue that Niebuhr's critical understanding of reason, a human rational capacity to consider interests other than one's own, offers an important resource in rectifying the disorder created by the two issues. Despite his stringent critique of a liberal idealistic view of reason, Niebuhr refused to completely deny the value of reason; although reason is always tainted by sin, it is not entirely ineffectual. This critical notion of reason is a necessary antidote to the unilateralism of the Bush administration and religious fundamentalism which altogether reject a dialogical, reflective value of reason. In an increasingly interdependent global society, a critical use of reason is indispensable for the achievement of global peace and justice.     

A Two‐Tiered Method for Identifying Trends in Media Framing of Policy Issues: The Case of the War on Terror

Research on media framing of policy issues has flourished. Yet the varied approaches to conceptualizing and operationalizing issue frames that make this literature rich also hinder its advancement. Here, we document the benefits of a two‐tiered method: the first level accounts for issue‐specific frames, while the second level tracks frames that generalize across issues. For this study, we draw on generalizable frames from prospect theory (loss vs. gain frames) and social identity theory (self‐referential vs. other‐referential frames). We discuss the theoretical merits of a two‐tiered approach, arguing that it should yield compound insights greater than the sum of its parts. Applying this method to newspaper coverage of the war on terror, we find a strong trend at the generalizable level: media framing of the war shifted over time from a predominant use of “fear” (self‐referential loss) frames to an increasing use of “charity” (other‐referential gain) frames. Our approach further reveals that the fear frames used in the lead‐up to the Iraq War were not driven by issue‐specific frames related to terrorism or weapons of mass destruction as we might have thought, but rather by frames related to the anticipated threats to U.S. troops. This study sharpens our understanding of how framing of the war evolved, but more broadly it suggests that a two‐tiered approach could be applied both within and across policy issues to advance our understanding of the framing process.     

Cold War,Public Opinion,and Foreign Policy Spending Decisions: Dynamic Representation by Congress and the President

Conventional wisdom before the Vietnam War held that public opinion exerted no influence on U.S. foreign policy decisions. Scholars working in Vietnam's aftermath found episodic influence of public opinion on foreign policy, but missing in our understanding were longitudinal examinations of public opinion's influence on foreign policy. A number of post-Vietnam scholars subsequently revealed a long-term relationship between public opinion and defense spending. This study extends that work by analyzing responsiveness to public opinion in different foreign policy arenas by different government institutions, and by accounting for a critical variable not relevant in most previous studies: the end of the cold war. We construct a model explaining the influences of public opinion and the cold war on spending proposals for defense and foreign economic aid by the presidency, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Both public opinion and the end of the cold war exert direct influence on defense spending proposals by the presidency, while the Senate and the House respond primarily to public opinion inputs and the partisan composition of the Senate. In the case of foreign economic aid, the cold war's end gives occasion for increasing spending proposals, contrary to the public's expectation that the end of the cold war minimized the need for the U.S. to provide foreign economic assistance.     

国外旅游政策研究:进展、争论与展望

旅游政策是政府实现旅游业发展目标的重要手段,但目前对旅游政策的研究还相对薄弱,研究成果的理论性、实践性、系统性和全面性亟待加强.本文在对国外旅游政策文献梳理的基础上,按照主题对文献内容进行分析总结,研究发现:(1)40年前旅游政策的研究就已开始,但进展十分缓慢,研究多以实证为主,理论性十分薄弱;(2)旅游政策的研究多从制定、实施、演化或评估的角度切入,且多数是从财政、税收或环境角度对专项旅游政策进行研究;(3)在旅游政策研究内容方面,旅游可持续发展是近几年旅游政策研究的热点,对旅游政策的经济目标性研究在弱化,而对旅游政策的社会目标性研究在加强.     

Pandours,Partisans, and Petite Guerre: The Two Dimensions of Enlightenment Discourse on War

During the Enlightenment period a certain notion of war came to prominence in European thought. This notion, which I here refer to as ‘civilized war’, centred on the idea that European war-making in the eighteenth century was characterised by humanity and honour. This image of European war-making was sustained by a variety of intellectuals and even some military practitioners who reflected not only on the practice of war in Europe in this period, but on the practice of war among supposedly less ‘civilised’ peoples in other parts of the world and in Europe's barbaric past. In these other places, among other peoples, and at other times, warfare was characterised as altogether less ‘civilised’, less ordered, less humane and honourable, and was thus considered more ‘savage’. I will argue in this paper, however, that there were at least two dimensions to the Enlightenment discourse on civilised war: the first dimension stressed the moral qualities of civilised war, its honour and humanity above all; the second dimension emphasised its technical or rational qualities that gave European war-makers a decisive military advantage over non-European war-makers. These two dimensions applied to conventional or symmetrical war between sovereign militaries contending by massed fire power on the field of battle. They were less easily applicable to petite guerre, that is, unconventional, asymmetric or partisan war. Here, the two dimensions of the idea of civilised war were shadowed by persistent anxieties about the status of both dimensions of civilised war.     

The War on Terror from the Perspective of Indonesia and Saudi Arabia

This article examines the perspective of two major Islamic nations—Saudi Arabia and Indonesia—toward the United States' War on terror and how this war shaped and influenced the behavior of the two Islamic governments toward domestic challenges and their partnership with the United States, as they have declared their support of the United States. Indeed the war against terror has developed several security concerns for both Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. However, each state has followed different methods to fight Islamic radical movements as well as a different framework of partnership with the United States on its war against terrorism.