Islam, Securitization, and US Foreign Policy

Shipoli, Erdoan

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-71111-9

Cited by 27 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, if Trump behaves violently and arbitrarily, the American people can impeach him via the constitutional mechanism. Trump claimed that his antiimmigration policy was to protect America from invasion of immigrants (Shipoli 2018). Hence, this particular case adequately illustrates that politics is how power is exercised legitimately.…”

Section: Politics and Power: A Critical Perspective On Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 81%

“…His decision to issue this policy has been considered one of the most significant impacts on American foreign policy and national security. To impose his presidential decree, Trump recruited the anti-immigrant staff (Shipoli 2018), and he understands that his policy could hurt many Americans who do not support the immigrant ban and potentially impact the economy of America. However, the American constitution and American people give the office for Trump and enable him to issue a presidential decree and make him legitimately hire even the most anti-immigrant staff to help him apply the anti-immigrant policy.…”

Section: Politics and Power: A Critical Perspective On Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Politics and Power: A Critical Perspective on Legitimacy

Tambunan

2021

jsps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We know from research into politics and power that these two variables are widely discussed as interrelated concepts. However, what remains poorly understood is that politics is not only interrelated with the concept of power, but politics itself is about how power is exercised legitimately. This research aims to ascertain whether politics can be reduced to power and, if so, what precisely the concept of power can explain the essence of politics. A literature study was deployed in order to answer these questions. The findings showed that power is the essence of politics; politics are enterprises sharing and shaping power. However, politics can be adequately understood if power is viewed as a legitimate capacity to act. Approaching politics outside of this definition cannot be said as a proper definition of politics because legitimacy is the heart and essential to power, and only by applying this definition politics can be adequately interpreted. If politics is seen as a right to govern and power is understood as the legitimate capacity to act, thus, these two elements will create a political obligation that is vital in a political concept. Consent and legitimacy are the two aspects necessary to achieve the right to exercise governments' political authority. If power is exercised legitimately, then it will draw people trust. People trust is the precondition in political concepts and political legitimacy, which indicates the rightfulness to govern conferred by people to political regimes or political sovereignty established in the collective advantage or common good.

show abstract

Section: Politics and Power: A Critical Perspective On Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Politics and Power: A Critical Perspective On Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Politics and Power: A Critical Perspective on Legitimacy

Tambunan

2021

jsps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although securitization has only been recently theorized in international relations (Shipoli 2018) and political science, it is among the most used tools by the political elite to convince the public of the necessity of their use of extraordinary (often undesirable) measures by arguing that there is an existential threat to the community; thus, extraordinary measures are required (i.e., there is a state of exception).…”

Section: Securitization To Legitimize and Delegitimizementioning

confidence: 99%

Authoritarian Use of Religion to Delegitimize and Securitize the Opposition

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the use of religion by an authoritarian ruling party to delegitimize political opposition through securitization. The case study presented is the ruling AKP in Turkey, which initially promised to desecuritize the Kurdish issue to co-opt the Kurdish opposition but eventually resorted to the demonization narratives and repressive policies of the secular Turkish state; however, in addition to labeling the Kurdish opposition as terrorists, the AKP deployed religion to legitimize its repressive policies on religious grounds. The Turkish case shows that not in legitimizing (via desecuritization), but in delegitimizing opposition (via securitization) religion has been the main tool deployed by the ruling party. This finding needs to be tested in other contexts and cases. Additionally, since this paper only focuses on the narrative of the AKP’s religious delegitimization, further research is needed to measure its efficacy and impact.

show abstract

“…For example, Magcamit (2017) examines Trump's attempts to securitise the U.S. economy (p. 17). Additionally, Floyd (2019) notes President Trump's securitisation of terrorism, which led to several 'security measures' (p. 61), while Shipoli (2018) examines President Trump's securitisation of Islam and argues that Trump's election win was a consequence of the 'unsuccessful desecuritization of Islam in American politics' (p. 96). These articles underline that Trump can be a securitising actor; however, while covering several issues that Trump has securitised, the authors do not consider whether Trump has securitised the news media, despite, in the case of Shipoli (2018), acknowledging that Trump has a hostile and unconventional relationship with the media (pp.…”

Section: News Media As the Threatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing the U.S. news media as a threat: President Donald Trump’s securitising move

Etholm

2022

CVIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While securitisation theory sees that the news media can be both a securitising actor and audience, the existing literature has not explored cases where the media are framed as the threat. This article illustrates how former President Donald Trump framed the U.S. news media as a threat, and argues that this constitutes a securitising move. Discourse analysis informed by framing theory is applied to a sample of tweets posted by Trump. These examples illustrate how Trump has continuously framed the media as a threat, highlighting the referent object as being a threat to the truth, the people and the country, thereby undertaking a securitising move.

show abstract

Islam, Securitization, and US Foreign Policy

Cited by 27 publications

References 0 publications

Politics and Power: A Critical Perspective on Legitimacy

Politics and Power: A Critical Perspective on Legitimacy

Authoritarian Use of Religion to Delegitimize and Securitize the Opposition

Framing the U.S. news media as a threat: President Donald Trump’s securitising move

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About