Critical Approaches

Content• What is Critical Theory• Critical approaches to Human Insecurity• Feminist perspective • Identity• Conclusion

Critical Theory - Robert Cox:

– ‘Theory is always for someone and for some purpose’

– Critical theories came about because traditional approaches failed to take into account longer historical and more general factors that can help us to understand the foreign policy of states

Critical approaches in Foreign Policy analysis refers to a number of different theoretical perspectives that might include post modernism, post structuralism, discourse analysis, feminism and critical theory.

We will be focusing on Feminism, Identity and Human Security.

Critical theory has its roots in a strand of thought which is often traced back to the enlightenment and connected to the writings of scholars such as Kant, Hegel and Mark. Not only does this theory challenge the traditional forms of theorizing , but it also problematizes and seeks to dismantle entrenched forms of social life that constrain human freedom.

What is CP?• Critical approach has a different epistemology and ontology compared to

those traditional ways of thinking because it looks at the world in a different way. It challenges the very narrow perspective of traditional ways of thinking.

• We can differentiate between critical and traditional approaches; traditional approach accepts the world the way it is where as critical approach challenges the way the world has been constructed for us through the traditional approaches.

• It challenges the concepts that were seen dominant and accepted such as states, the international system etc.

Problem Solving and Critical Theory• There are two types of theories: Problem Solving Theory and Critical Theory• Problem solving theory comes under the traditional approach, It takes the

world as it finds it with the prevailing social and power relationships and institutions into which they are organized, as the given framework for action.

• Cox identifies the other type of theory which is critical theory; he explains that critical theory is critical In the sense that it stands apart from the prevailing world-order and asks how that order came about.

Problem- solving theories are marked by two main characteristics.• The first one being by a positivist methodology , and the second by a

tendency to legitimize prevailing social and political structures.

Problem- Solving • Problem – solving theories suppose that positivism provides the only

legitimate basis of knowledge, as its heavily influenced by the methodologies of the natural sciences.

• Steve Smith (1996:13) remarks, as the ‘gold standard’ which other theories are evaluated. There are many other types of characteristics that can be identified with positivism. However there are two that are particularly relevant.

• 1) Positivist assume that facts and values can be separated .• 2) And that its possible to separate subject and object.• This shows that not only does an objective world exists independently of

human consciousness , but that objective knowledge of social reality is possible.

• Cox (1981:128)defines problem- solving theory as, “takes the world as it finds it, with the prevailing social and power relationships and institutions into which they are organized, as the given framework for action. It does not question the present order, but has the effect of legitimizing and reifying it”.

Criticisms of traditional theory• Language does not connect us directly with a ‘truth’ or ‘reality’ that exists

outside of it. Our understanding of ‘truth’ and ‘reality’ are constituted through, or is mediated through, language. For example, think of how terrorism is used to justify US foreign policy.

Critical approaches to Human InsecurityIntroduction

• Human security was first popularized by the UN development programme and was a response to an observation after the end of the cold war that in today's conflicts civilians are often the victims and even the primary targets of violence. It also builds on an idea, which had been gaining momentum since the end of the World War II , that peoples rights are at least important as those of states.

• It has relevance in a context where, since the end of the cols war, the majority of casualties in war have been civilian, where more than 30 million people have been displaced from their homes, child soldiers being recruited or forced into violent conflict etc.

• Therefore the purpose of human security is an attempt to respond to a new global reality of failed states.

• The core concern underpinning the human security concept is the inextricable interrelationship between freedom from want and freedom from free (Thomas 2004:353). This rests on a holistic understanding in which the vulnerability of individuals poses a threat to and hence the safety of individual is key to – global security (Hampson 2004:350).

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTv6nJM_WQA• What is Human Security?

A Critical Concept

Human security emphasizes meeting basic material needs as well as preserving human dignity, which includes meaningful participation in a community. Caroline Thomas(2000:xi) argues that in this respect the concept creates distance from the neo-liberal conception of the individual as competitive and possessive.

• A central underlying assumption of the human security paradigm is that sustainable economic development requires a minimal level of security.

• One of the pioneers in rethinking security , Barry Buzan (2004), has criticized the human security concept. To begin with he argues that it is already encompassed by the Copenhagen School’s concept ‘Societal Security’. As a result , the concept is not sufficiently differentiated from human rights and eliminates the distinctiveness of international security. Buzan recognizes that the state is ‘a necessary condition for individual security because without the state it is not clear what other agency is to act on behalf of individuals’. (Buzan 2000:6) . To add to this he also states that , because it bypasses the state, human security takes away what seems to be the necessary agent through which individual security might be achieved.

A Critical Analysis• In the coverage of development and security discourses, critical arguments

about development have been replaced by liberal ones . • Marxists view human security as a repackaging of liberal humanitarianism ,

with its routine failure to address underlying social causes (Thomas 2004:353).

• At the core of a more critical analysis is a methodological question . There are two dimensions to this claim.

• The first regards the two models of development. The liberal model locates the problem of human insecurity in the failure of individual states to proceed along the pathway to successful statehood.

• The dependency model, by contrast, locates the problem in historical and global relations that continue to constrain or under develop large parts of the world.

• Therefore the two models represent different theoretical assumptions about why exactly some states are successful and others not so much.

Feminism• Critical feminists focus on gender as a social relationship of inequality as

well as the power of ideas and ideologies in reproducing gender relations. • Sandra Whitworth would argue that ‘institutions, social practices and ideas

combined to sustain gender relations of inequality’.• We live in a patriarchal society which allows men (even the most

disadvantaged) to exercise power over women.• Apart from the occasional head of state, there is little evidence to suggest

that women have played much of a role in shaping foreign policy in any country in the twentieth century.

• Traditional feminists tried to draw attention and eliminate the legal restraints barring women’s access to full participation in the public world.

• Most contemporary feminist scholars, claim that the sources of discrimination against women run much deeper: they are enmeshed in the economic, cultural, and social structures of society.

…• Looking back at the 1987 presidential primary campaign, a picture of

Patricia Schroeder crying after she withdrew was front page on major American newspapers. This led to many discussions about her suitability as a presidential candidate.

• ‘Many people in the United States had strong misgivings over the thought of an emotional woman with her finger on the nuclear button.’

• The few women who do make it in to foreign policy also complain about not being taken seriously, Jeane Kirkpatrick is one example. As the ambassador of the United Nations, she explained that she failed to have any affect whatsoever on the course of American foreign policy because of the lack of respect to her sex.

• She saw her self as a “mouse in a man’s world.”

Case study: War On Terror

• The September 11 attacks on the US by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda• Media coverage of the immediate aftermath of the attack on the Twin Towers

focused heavily on the heroism of the emergency services.• Total invisibility of woman in the media coverage of the rescue and recovery

efforts in NY• According to an analysis by The Guardian, women virtually disappeared

from newspaper pages and TV screens after 9/11• In times of conflict women are seen only as victims…. the media only

focused on Afghan women in the blue burqa while reporting about women.• After 9/11 the George Bush administration saw a large number of (mostly

white) men in charge of briefing the world about ‘America’s New War’ both at home and abroad. Many argued that it was only right when “our men” are protecting us against other men.

…• Men’s association with war-fighting and national security serves to reinforce

their legitimacy in world politics while it acts to create barriers for women. Men are seen biologically suitable while women are not.

• However, Joshua Goldstein’s study of gender and war suggests that biology is in fact less constraining than culture with respect to the roles men and women can play in war and peace. He asks if men are made not born, could we envisage a new form of “hegemonic” masculinity less validated by a false biological association with war.

• However…• Critical Feminism has weaknesses: it is better at critiquing the status quo,

than changing it. It doesn't’t offer a solution to the problem of how to achieve system change.

…• Anne-Marie Slaughter describes the challenges women face in foreign policy

as well as the advances women have made in the field.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meCogPMpkis

Identity‘’The definition of Identity as a ‘dangerous other’ is related to conflict and clear ‘insides’ and ‘outsides’ or hierarchy in some form’’. (K.M. Fierke). International Relations theory often gives the belief that all states have the same identity. In Internationals Relations theory, Kenneth Waltz (1979) argues that the internal features of states do not imply the internal behaviours of that state. Both democratic and totalitarian states exhibit the same kind of competitive behaviour, and share a common identity which is sovereignty. This means that their larger environment of anarchy is defined by sovereignty. The concept of identity relies on the belief that there is a possibility of change between various identities.

…• Studies show that each individual in society has different identities which

include; language, characteristics, physical behaviours i.e. dressings, gestures, habits etc. Which are as a result of formed practices over time.

• In every society, there are specific expansive formations which control and strive against one another. Societies are bounded by social intellectual structures.

• The identity of an individual has the ability to contribute to the formation of a social structure.

• At the same time, these identities are inhibited, fashioned, and empowered by the same social products they create.

…• An assumption states that the only purpose for the existence of identities is

to maintain social order, relationships and predictability.• Dialogue is a possible process which identities are formed. • Interests and identities go well when combined. These factors can hardly

exist in individual causal relationships, but are however mutually connected through the ‘manhandling’ of politics. (Fierke, 2007).

• Identity is believed to be a factor that is socially created, and the social effects they have on individuals and not their physical existence.

The Relationship between Gender Identity and Feminism.• From a woman’s perspective, strong gender identifications may promote the

bridging of the gender gap. While, the male gender may make a move against feminism as a movement.

• In a study carried out by some university students, it was found out that one’s self-esteem was based on one’s gender.

• In relation to past and re-occurring research, women supported feminism more than men. Whereas in the case of both genders, feminist ideas were identified on more than the actual identification as a feminist.

• For feminists working with the American Women’s Movement, feminism is a crucial group identity. For example; members of the National Organisation for Women commonly identify themselves as feminists. People may familiarise with the goals of the group, but evade being identified as feminists in order to not be seen as part of such a defamed movement. This may cause a hindrance to the development of the group’s identity in relation to their shared action. (Burn et al, 2000).

Identity and the U.S Foreign Policy• According to David Campbell, the U.S policy of containment was not

merely as a result of Soviet policies but were part of the U.S identity as a democracy and the leader of the ‘free world’.

• As a result of the conflict between U.S and the Soviet Union, the U.S identity created policies such as; the formation of NATO, leadership of the ‘free world’, and the commitment to preserve and outspread the ‘free world’.

• The U.S foreign policy could be understood as a political practice based on the constitution, and the creation and preservation of the American political identity.

Conclusion• In conclusion, traditional concepts of theory tend to work in favour of stabilizing

prevailing structures of world order and their accompanying inequalities of power and wealth.

• Critical theory has made a major contribution to IR theory. One of these contributions has been in the increase of awareness of the link between knowledge and politics. To add to this critical theory rejects the idea of the theorist as a objective observer or even detached bystander.

• On the other hand traditional theories tend to take the state for granted but critical theory analyses the changing ways in which the boundaries of community are formed, maintained and transformed.

• Human security is critical in so far as it raises questions about the conventional emphasis of security studies on the state. However the liberal assumptions underlying the concept, and the development and security discourses from which it emerged, have not been critically scrutinised.

• Human security is critical in so far as it raises questions about the conventional emphasis of security studies on the state. However the liberal assumptions underlying the concept, and the development and security discourses from which it emerged , have not been critically scrutinised.

• Identity is identified in different ways such as; language, and physical appearances etc. which have been formed over time by social influences.

• The concept of feminism is considered more as an identity than the actual identity in itself by both genders.

• Finally, the U.S foreign policy is often argued to be a form of identity for the U.S citizens, and a way of life.

Bibliography• Baldwin, D. (1995). Security Studies and the End of the Cold War, World Politics,

48,1,pp.117-41.• Burn, S.M, Aboud, R, Moyles, C. (2000). The Relationship between Gender Social

Identity and Support for Feminism. California: California Polytechnic State University. • Clarke, M., White, B (1989). Understanding Foreign Policy: The Foreign Policy System

Approach. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. p109-125.• Fierke, K.M. (2007). Critical Approaches to International Security. Cambridge: Polity

Press. • Freedman, L. (1998). International Security: Changing Targets, Foreign Policy,110,pp.48-

63.• Hill, C (2003). The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

p1-19.• Hopf, T. (1999). Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign

Policies. Moscow: Cornell University Press.• Steans, J (2006). Gender and International Relations. Cambridge: Polity Press. p33-47.• Tickner, A. (1992) Gender in International Relations. Feminist Perspective on Achieving

Global Security. 16 (1), 2-6. • Webber, M., Smith, M (2002). Foreign Policy In A Transformed World. Essex: Pearson

Education. P11-24