The Foreign Policy Discourse In The United Kingdom And The United States In The New World Order

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

With the end of the Cold War, many commentators expected a renewed emphasis on domestic policy as a result of this major change in foreign policy. Until the attacks of 11 September 2001, this is exactly what happened. The “new world order” in domestic terms, celebrated the triumph of capitalism and free markets. At this time, Milton Friedman’s economic ideas were all the rage and Keynes completely out of fashion. The economic problems of the 1970s, in combination with the manifest failure of communist economies, had largely discredited the traditional notion of the Left and party rhetoric reflected this. Both the Democrats and Labour had begun in the 1980s (faced with the success of Reagan and Thatcher) a process of redefinition: people talked of “New Democrats” and “New Labour”. During the campaign of 1992, Clinton insisted on the need for a “modern, mainstream agenda” and used key terms often associated with conservatism like “expansion of opportunity”, “choice”, “responsibility” and “reinventing government”. Labour, especially after Tony Blair became leader in 1994, followed the same path. Both the Conservatives and the Republicans had pushed to the right in the late 1970s and continued this trend in the following years. Although their electoral fortunes varied, they increasingly found themselves divided between moderate and more rightwing members. In Britain this division focused on Europe while, in the US, it usually concerned social and ethical questions. By 2010, the Conservatives had attained some cohesion under David Cameron but, the Republicans were openly feuding. This book’s originality lies in its scope, in its comparative aspect, and its inclusion of first person accounts as well as scholarly studies. In particular, the book includes one of the first major analyses of the health care debate from Clinton’s failed attempt to the conclusion of Obama’s successful one. Highly up to date and topical, it also discusses discourse related to the recent economic crisis, the so-called “Climategate” scandal, the UK elections of 2010, the gay rights debates in the US, “Islamophobia”, and the Arizona immigration law.

Much has been written about the events of 9/11 and its aftermath as constituting a rupture in US and world history. This book, however, proposes that while the attacks on US homeland were unprecedented, the ensuing discourse of President G.W. Bush and his ¿war on terror¿ campaign cannot be said to constitute a radical departure. The book aims to show that President Bush¿s statements and actions since 9/11 belong within a broader unfolding discourse of the ¿New World Order', which has been underway since the end of the Cold War. To make their case, Lazar and Lazar adapt and develop Foucault¿s notion of ¿discourse formation¿ for a critical discourse analysis of almost two decades of post-Cold War presidential texts and talk, including speeches, press conferences, radio addresses, policy documents, and interviews. This book is the first to be jointly written by a linguist and a political scientist, allowing for the marriage of theoretical and analytical insights from international relations, international security studies, strategic studies, political discourse analysis and critical discourse studies.

Empirical case studies demonstrate how foreign policy actions depend on discourse in order to appear possible and to become plausible. This study of discourse is offered as a tool for assessing presidential administrations.

Questions long-perceived views of post-World War II America and its position in the world, especially after Vietnam. The author details the challenges the economic transition of the 1970s and 1980s engendered as the US and Great Britain together actively pursued their shared ideal of an international assemblage of market-based democratic states.

This book explores the foreign and security policies of Germany, France and the UK vis-à-vis China. Despite the progress made by the Lisbon Treaty and notwithstanding the first EU Global Strategy, the European Union does not have a strategy to address the rise of China. Since this strategic deficit does not automatically reflect the level of EU member states, this book argues that the vacuum at EU level provides member states with an opportunity to fill this gap. By assuming that an increase in national policies on China would eventually lead to a comprehensive European strategy for China, the author focuses on the three biggest European countries and looks at the rise of China to understand the development of the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy vis-à-vis the PRC. While the CFSP depends on the contribution of EU member states, their role in shaping the CFSP towards China has not been researched yet, and this book fills the gap.

Examines how German reunification and the end of the Quadripartite Agreement in 1990 impacted the AngloAmerican special relationshipLuca Ratti offers new insights into the role of the Anglo-American aspecial relationship in German reunification, and examines the impact that Germanys reunification had on Anglo-American and transatlantic relations. Germanys unification in October 1990 was one of the most momentous events in modern European history and world politics since the end of World War II. German unity ended the Cold War in Europe, accelerated the collapse of communist regimes across Eastern Europe, and the disintegration of the USSR in 1991. It also triggered NATOs transformation at the London and Rome summits of the Alliance and deepened Europes political and economic integration with the signing of the treaty of Maastricht in 1992. Key FeaturesAnalyses and compares attitudes, reactions and developments in the US and BritainConsiders their interface with the views and initiatives of the West German governmentOffers new insight into an issue central to Anglo-American and transatlantic relationsIncludes interview with key decision makers involved in the negotiations in 198990 such as John Major, James Baker III, Helmut Khol and Hans Dietrich Genscher