War in the Land of Egypt: Yusuf al-Qa'id: Translated by Olive and Lorne Kenney and Christopher Tingley

Book reviewed in this article: Houses Behind the Trees: Mohamed El-Bisatie: Translated by Denys Johnson-Davies     

Not a Soldier,Not a Slacker: Conscientious Objectors and Male Citizenship in the United States during the Second World War

This essay argues that the 1940 Selective Service Act introduced new tensions between pacifism and male citizenship in the United States. Even as the draft required tens of millions of American men to answer Uncle Sam's call and promoted a new norm of male military obligation, it also specified the acceptable grounds for conscientious objection and created bureaucratic mechanisms for distinguishing between sincere objectors and ‘slackers’. Using Selective Service and organisational records, letters, diaries, interviews and the media, I suggest that male citizenship has been defined not only by idealised and gendered duties, but also by the difficulties and exceptions involved in their practical realisation.     

Rape as a Weapon of War(riors): The Militarisation of Sexual Violence in the United States, 1990–2000

This article uses a transnational feminist lens to examine how accusations of sexual violence were mobilised by the United States (US) government to justify military intervention at the same time that the US military failed to address sexual violence perpetrated by and against its own service members. Drawing upon an archive of civilian representations ranging from the New York Times to G.I. Jane, the author explores US interventions in the Persian Gulf, Haiti and the former Yugoslavia alongside sexual assaults committed by servicemen at the Tailhook Convention, on Okinawa and at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. This article draws connections between feminism and neo‐imperialism, between Cold War and War on Terror ideologies, and between rape as a weapon of war and rape during times of ‘peace’ in order to better understand the relationships between sexual politics and geopolitics at the end of the twentieth century.     

The Supreme Court in Times of Hot and Cold War: Learning from the Sounds of Silence for a War on Terrorism

Justice William J. Brennan once remarked that the Court has never fully developed a jurisprudence of national security. It is simply too episodic, he said. ¹ Our present Chief Justice would, it would seem, largely agree, though his own research shows some greater willingness for the Court to superintend—at least after the fact ² —the actions of the executive in times of war or similar crisis. My assignment in this essay was to ask the question slightly differently; namely, has the posture of the Court differed in times of hot or cold war, and if so, how has it differed? As will be evident momentarily, that question is less helpful to our present circumstance than it might seem. Why? Because, frankly, we are in neither a hot nor cold war, but something quite different ³ —something that has the potential to be not only hot, but blistering, and something which will likely never be fully appreciated as having gone truly cold.