| Abstract [eng] |
The Construction of the US Identity through the ‘Islamic State’ Threat The construction of the US identity in International Relations has been widely discussed after the September 11 attacks. Though, the same cannot be said in the context of the ‘Islamic State’. Several years after the President Barack Obama‘s declaration about the substantial change of the main threat to the security of the US, there is still very little research made on the construction of the identity related to ISIL threat. This study aims to fill this gap in academic literature and to emphasize the importance of the international icon in the field of postructuralism. The overall purpose of this study is to investigate how the US identity is constructed through the ‘Islamic State’ threat, and what are the main changes or continuity. In order to implement the main purpose of this study these objectives were set: 1.To analyse the importance of the contrast between the ‘self’ and the ‘other’ and the articulation of terrorism threat. 2. To investigate the official discourse of President B. Obama, which was related to ISIL and to find out how the foreign policy of the US is legitimised. 3. To compare B. Obama’s discourse with G. W. Bush’s discourse and to analyse what are the main tendencies in the construction of the US identity. The analysis of the academic literature revealed that one of the main components in the construction of the identity is the articulation of the ‘self’ and the ‘other’, with emphasis on radical or not completely radical difference. It was clarified that terrorism as ‘foreign’ threat has been used in order to mobilise heterogeneous society of the US and to legitimise the security agenda. The discourse of B. Obama has been investigated through three dimensions: spatiality, temporality, and ethicality. The investigation revealed that the most common dimension is spatial, by which the ISIL threat has been reframed from regional to global. The comparison of two mentioned discourses have showed that there are some important differences: G. W. Bush articulated al-Qaeda‘s link to Islam, while B. Obama entirely separates the ‘Islamic State‘ from religion. The comparison revealed that this operates as the justification of military actions in Syria and Iraq. Both presidents present threat as a ‘terrorism’, ‘barbaric’, ‘embodiment of evil’, ‘cruel’ and ‘cancer, which must be stamped out’. They articulate leading role of the US in the context of threat elimination, emphasising the ‘justice’ and good values of the state. The importance of international icon has been defined in order to represent the US as a ‘victim’. There are several guidelines how investigation of the US identity through the ‘Islamic State’ threat can be extended. The analysis of other discourses such as different political actors, the media, and popular culture can be implemented. It is important to notice that this kind of discourse is relevant, therefore, it has a perspective for further investigation. |
