PROJECT TERROR: State Projects, U.S. Policy and the Construction of the War on Terror

• In Event: 066 - Section on Political Sociology Roundtables (one-hour)
  In Refereed Roundtable: Table 04. The Politics of Knowledge

Abstract

The absence of a universal definition of terrorism has resulted in varied – and even conflicting – interpretations of the phenomenon within national legal systems. Defining terrorism and operationalizing the mechanisms to combat it can thus be perceived as a ‘state project’ (Jessop 1990) rather than a global one; it is a tool necessary for state formation, cohesion, and hegemony. Since each State has the liberty to define terrorism and formulate laws or policies in line with it, the processes by which a state conceptualizes and operationalizes terrorism reflects particular political (rather than human rights) interests, and ultimately becomes another instrument of state power. In the case of the United States, the adoption of post-9/11 counterterrorism policies reflected the development of a highly politicized discourse on the ‘War on Terror,’ and was the product of the need to prove American resilience and national might in the face of an “unknown enemy.”
Drawing on the theoretical lens of Bob Jessop’s (1990) strategic-relational approach to examining states, this paper examines the strategic political processes engaged in by the United States to define and frame terrorism through formal laws and government policies over time. The aim is to understand how these processes relate to the development of a discourse and regime around terrorism (and counter-terrorism) that not merely seeks to address the threat, but more significantly, becomes another mechanism to consistently ensure and reify the global hegemonic power of the United States.

Author

• Erika Mae Lorenzana Del Villar, University of Connecticut