Discursive Shifts in International Relations (IR) and US Foreign Policy.

The purpose of this paper is twofold. Firstly it seeks to address the burgeoning literature developing on discourse analysis within the discipline of IR (Doty, 1996, Larsen, 1997, 1999, Milliken 1999, Fierke 1998, Campbell 1998, Hansen 2006). In particular, I turn to the relevance of this approach for conceptualising traditional agent-structure and self-other relations as dialectical. Theorising the relationship between identity and recognition will thus become imperative throughout the paper. Taking these finding as a starting point, the second section moves to outline patterns of continuity and change systematically introduced into the Bush administration’s foreign policy discourse since September 2001. Essentially I maintain that the democratic language constructed therein has created a legitimacy crisis for the US by exposing a glaring gap between its words and deeds. Using discourse analysis as a tool, the analysis offers an alternative angle from which to explain and understand the tension created by such inconsistencies. Harnessing this approach, moreover, provides a lens to observe how these variations have opened up the space for alternative interpretations of current US foreign policy objectives. In sum, I seek to illustrate how the concept of democracy has changed from a widely accepted term into a paradox that the Bush administration has had to defend within its ambitious foreign policy goals. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]