A ‘continuing, imminent’ threat: the temporal frameworks enabling the US war on terrorism

Abstract

For nearly two decades, the United States has chosen to narrate its response to terrorism through what Judith Butler refers to as the ‘frame of war’. Despite this, victory in that country’s longest war remains largely unimaginable. In some ways this is a problem of time – it is not that victory or an end to the conflict is literally unimaginable, it’s that from our political present, an end appears radically discontinuous. This article builds on recent work using temporality and the political present as a lens and conceptual framework to better understand how temporal assumptions and frames shape the practice of war and political violence. In this article, I show how time and timing play a significant role in justifying the violence of the war on terrorism and in making it intelligible as war. I examine the past three administrations and focus on three areas – the borders of wartime, temporal continuity, and the vision of a post-war future – to show important differences in administrative approaches. To more concretely understand the practice of political violence going forward, attention to the temporal dynamics of politics must be front and center, particularly one possessing ambivalent frames. Doing so reveals the implications these dynamics have for the conduct and permissibility of violence.

Peace needs constant reproduction: The temporality of the diplomatic system

“…The trace of a past peace (Franz, 2022: 777) is not sufficient, and neither is an endless future ‘of hope and waiting’ (Altan-Olcay, 2022: 387); instead, peace needs to continue being always imminent and reactualized (cf. McIntosh, 2022). Peace does involve a negative component, namely a political commitment to restrain violent capacities against the addressee; but this negative commitment needs positive communication.…”

Carrot or stick, or both? Examining U.S. presidents' use of counterterrorism tools in Pakistan, 2001–2020

“…Military force has been the centerpiece of the U.S. response to the September 11th terrorist attacks. McIntosh (2022) argues that defining the fight against al‐Qaeda as a “war” has led the United States to overmilitarize its counterterrorism response and entrap the United States in a perpetual state of war against the group. Successive presidential administrations have relied on drone strikes and targeted killings to prosecute the GWoT.…”

Heidegger’s heritage: The temporal politics of authenticity, then and now

“…136 The substantive content here concerns white supremacy's renewal, but the form follows the familiar existential pattern of realising authentic Being through provocative, individual action unmoored from societal consequences. Destructive transgression lends such acts an 'eventfulness' -the quality of a discrete temporal whole binding past and future in a meaningful present 137 -reminiscent of both Heidegger's ecstasis and the promise of cultural renewal ( §65:373-74). As the 2011 Oslo attacker put it, 'Now our lives truly belong only to the Order.…”