Introduction: Interpreting British Foreign Policy

Bevir, Mark; Daddow, Oliver; Hall, Ian

doi:10.1111/j.1467-856x.2012.00537.x

Cited by 50 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 71 publications

(81 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Certain neo-conservative views were held by key Tory ministers such as Michael Gove, who convinced Cameron to stand for the Tory leadership, and Foreign Secretary William Hague, and played an instrumental role in the development of liberal-Conservatism that emphasises the national interest (Dodds and Elden, 2008;Hague, 2009;Daddow, 2013). It has been suggested that New Labour's foreign policy was a combination of many different positions to create an ethical foreign policy that would enable the British government to use force to intervene in humanitarian crises, in a similar way to neo-conservatism (Bevir et al, 2012). Daddow (2013) applies this point to Cameron as the strongest figure in the party pushing for change and who called for an adaption to the interventionist position by merging realism with idealism in order to pursue liberal-Conservatism.…”

Section: Heir To Blair?mentioning

confidence: 97%

The bridge that Blair built: David Cameron and the transatlantic relationship

Gannon

2014

Br Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Heir To Blair?mentioning

confidence: 97%

The bridge that Blair built: David Cameron and the transatlantic relationship

Gannon

2014

Br Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…14 Likewise, Bevir, Daddow and Hall's project on interpretivist approaches to foreign policy analysis situates policy agents in discursive structures that reference historical traditions and dilemmas as a means of legitimising or contesting current practice. 15 The point of these studies is to explore and analyse the discursive construction of the social world by investigating how discourses articulate and contest socio-political reality in ways that influence thinking and action. 16 The rise and fall of discourses helps to shape the parameters of what is politically possible.…”

Section: British Foreign Policy As Culturally Embedded Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

Before the vote: UK foreign policy discourse on Syria 2011–13

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature of recent UK policy toward Syria focuses on the 2013 chemical weapons crisis. We examine policy discourses leading up to that. The government supported the removal of Assad but faced the challenge of explaining how that would be realized. Given its unwillingness and inability to mobilise support for military intervention, or to tailor policy goals to match available means, government strategy arguably lacked credibility. Our purpose is to examine how the government tried to close this ends means gap and how, having failed to do that, its 'discursive strategy' legitimised its approach. We argue the resources for the government's discursive strategy on Syria can be found in the earlier articulation of 'liberal conservatism'. A policy that from an ideal-liberal or ideal-conservative position might have been criticised as half-baked was maintained by a strategy that gave consideration to, but did not completely follow through on, either archetype. Drawing on an analysis of 2152 sources and supplemented by elite interviews, we illustrate how this strategy managed the interplay of two basic discourses: a liberal insistence that the UK should support 'the Arab Spring' and a conservative insistence that military intervention was imprudent because 'Syria was not Libya'.

show abstract

“…28 First, the OAU and ASEAN were projects marked by postcolonialism. Ever since the first colonisers arrived in the sixteenth century to Southeast Asia and in the eighteenth century to Africa, the regions were subject to political and economic exploitation by external actors.…”

Section: Shared Starting Points and The Sanctions Dilemmamentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpreting sanctions in Africa and Southeast Asia

Hellquist

2015

International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) were both born to stabilise vulnerable state borders by practising non-interference in domestic affairs. Today, the OAU's successor, the African Union (AU), uses sanctions against unconstitutional changes of government, while ASEAN continues to rule out any collective punitive action against members. To explain these divergent trajectories, this article first shows how different traditions produced different ways of engaging with sanctions in the early formative cases of South Africa and Vietnam. Thereafter, it examines how these traditions were selectively re-thought when confronted with the dilemmas of international sanctions against Libya and Myanmar. The interpretive approach enables a nuanced account of continuity and change in beliefs about sanctions. The AU's sanctions doctrine has updated rather than broken with a traditional interpretation of non-interference. For ASEAN, the longstanding tradition of informality -and not strict adherence to non-interference -has continued to rule out regional sanctions.

show abstract

Introduction: Interpreting British Foreign Policy

Cited by 50 publications

References 71 publications

The bridge that Blair built: David Cameron and the transatlantic relationship

The bridge that Blair built: David Cameron and the transatlantic relationship

Before the vote: UK foreign policy discourse on Syria 2011–13

Interpreting sanctions in Africa and Southeast Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About