Counterterrorism, Identity, (In)security

  • Kathryn Marie Fisher
Part of the New Security Challenges book series (NSECH)


On 30 January 2014, British Home Secretary Theresa May of the Conservative Party.1 then with the support of Nick Clegg (Liberal Democrats) and Hazel Blears (Labour Party, former cabinet member), proposed a security amendment to the Immigration Bill, “deprivation of citizenship”:2
(60) Deprivation if conduct seriously prejudicial to vital interests of the UK.
  1. (1)

    In section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 (deprivation of citizenship), after subsection (4) insert–.

    “(4A) But that does not prevent the Secretary of State from making an order under subsection (2) to deprive a person of a citizenship status if—.
    1. (a)

      the citizenship status results from the person’s naturalisation, and

    2. (b)

      the Secretary of State is satisfied that the deprivation is conducive to the public good because the person, while having that citizenship status, has conducted him or herself in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom, any of the Islands, or any British overseas territory.” [emphasis added]



Citizenship Status Identity Construction Parliamentary Debate British Nationality Official Discourse 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 17.
    Fisher, Kathryn. ‘Exploring the temporality in/of British counterterrorism law and law making,’ Critical Studies on Terrorism 6(1) (2013): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 19.
    Wilkinson, Paul. “Introduction”, in Homeland Security in the UK: Future Preparedness for Terrorist Attack Since 9/11, edited by Paul Wilkinson, 6–7. Abingdon: Routledge, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 21.
    Aradau, Claudia and Van Munster, Rens. “Exceptionalism and the ‘War on Terror’: Criminology Meets International Relations,” British Journal of Criminology 49 (2009): 689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 22.
    Mark B. Salter. ‘When the exception becomes the rule: borders, sovereignty, and citizenship,’ Citizenship Studies 12(4) (2008): 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 25.
    For language as power, see Janice Bially Mattern, Ordering International Politics: Identity, Crisis, and Representational Force (New York: Routledge, 2005);Google Scholar
  6. Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. Civilizing the Enemy: German Reconstruction and the invention of the West. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006.Google Scholar
  7. 26.
    For other discussion on mechanisms, see Lichbach, Mark Irving. “Modeling Mechanisms of Contention: MTT’s Positivist Constructivism, Symposium on McAdam, Tarrow and Tilly’s ‘Measuring Mechanisms of Contention,’” Qualitative Sociology 31 (2008): 345–354;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Tilly, Charles. “To Explain Political Processes,” The American Journal of Sociology 100(6) (1995): 1594–1610;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Tilly, Charles. “Mechanisms in Political Processes,” Annual Review of Political Science 4 (2001): 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 27.
    Abdelal, Rawi, Herrera, Yoshiko M., Johnston, Alastair Iain, and McDermott, Rose (eds.). Measuring Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, 6–7.Google Scholar
  11. 28.
    Jackson, Richard. Writing the War on Terrorism: Language, Politics and Counter-Terrorism. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2005;Google Scholar
  12. Croft, Stuart. Culture, Crisis and America’s War on Terror. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Williams, Michael C. ‘Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics’, International Studies Quarterly 47 (2003): 511–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 30.
    On normativity, see Aradau, “Security and the democratic scene: desecuritization and emancipation,” Journal of International Relations and Development 7 (2004): 388–413;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Floyd, Rita. “Can securitization theory be used in normative analysis? Towards a just securitization theory,” Security Dialogue 42 (2011): 427–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 31.
    Zulaika, Joseba. Terrorism: The Self-fulfilling Prophecy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 32.
    Daase, Christopher and Kessler, Oliver. “Knowns and Unknowns in the ‘War on Terror’: Uncertainty and the Political Construction of Danger,” Security Dialogue 38 (2007): 411–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 33.
    Waever, Ole. “Securitization and desecuritization.” In On Security, edited by Ronnie D. Lipschutz, 46–86. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995;Google Scholar
  19. Buzan, Barry, Waever, Ole, and de Wilde, Jaap. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynn Rienner Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
  20. 35.
    Huysmans, Jef. “Revisiting Copenhagen: Or, On the Creative Development of a Security Studies Agenda in Europe.” European Journal of International Relations 4 (4) (1998): 490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 36.
    Buzan, Barry and Waever, Ole. “Macrosecuritisation and security constellations: reconsidering scale in securitisation theory,” Review of International Studies 35(2) (2009): 261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 38.
    Cf. Waever, Ole, Buzan, Barry, Kelstrup, Morten, and Lemaitre, Pierre. Identity, Migration and the New Security Agenda in Europe. London: Printer Publishers Ltd, 1993.Google Scholar
  23. 44.
    Hansen, Lene. Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War (37). London: Routledge, 2006.Google Scholar
  24. 45.
    Boyce, D. G. Englishmen and Irish Troubles: British Public Opinion and the Making of Irish Policy, 1918–1922 (107). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  25. 46.
    Moody, T. W. and Martin, F. X. The Course of Irish History. 4th ed. Lanham: Roberts Rinehart Publishers, 2001, 131.Google Scholar
  26. 48.
    Sanchez-Cuenca, Ignacio and de la Calle, Luis. “Domestic Terrorism: The Hidden Side of Political Violence,” Annual Review of Political Science 12 (2009): 32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 49.
    Croft, Stuart and Moore, Cerwyn. “The evolution of threat narratives in the age of terror: understanding terrorist threats in Britain,” International Affairs 86(4) (2010): 823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 51.
    John Shotter, Cultural Politics of Everyday Life. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993, 24.Google Scholar
  29. 54.
    Pouliot, Vincent. “‘Sobjectivisim’: Toward a Constructivist Methodology,” International Studies Quarterly 51(2) (2007): 366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 55.
    On parliamentary debate, see Neal, Andrew. “Legislative Practices.” In Research Methods in Critical Security Studies: An Introduction, edited by Mark B. Salter and Can E. Mutlu. New York: Routledge, 2012 and “Normalization and legislative exceptionalism: counterterrorist lawmaking and the changing times of security emergencies,” International Political Sociology 6(3) (2012): 260–276.Google Scholar
  31. 57.
    Nexon, Daniel H. The Struggle for Power in Early Modern Europe: Religious conflict, dynastic empires and international change. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009, 44–45.Google Scholar
  32. 58.
    On “constraints” and “opportunities”, see Almond, Gabriel A. and Guenca, Stephen. “Clouds, Clocks, and the Study of Politics.” In A Discipline Divided: Schools and sects in political science. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1990, 35.Google Scholar
  33. 60.
    Butler, Judith. “Explanation and Exoneration, or What We Can Hear,” Theory and Event 5(4) (2002): paragraph 3.Google Scholar
  34. 62.
    Blair, Tony. “A Battle for Global Values,” Foreign Affairs 86(1) (2007): 79–90.Google Scholar
  35. 63.
    Hall, Martin and Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus (eds.). Civilizational Identities: The production and reproduction of “civilizations” in International Relations. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007.Google Scholar
  36. 64.
    Krebs, Ronald R. and Lobasz, Jennifer. “The sound of silence: Rhetorical coercion, Democratic acquiescence, and the Iraq War.” In American Foreign Policy and the Politics of Fear: Threat inflation since 9/11, edited by A. Trevor Thrall and Jane K. Cramer, 117–134. London: Routledge, 2007;Google Scholar
  37. Jackson, Richard. Writing the War on Terrorism: Language, Politics and Counter-Terrorism. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2005.Google Scholar
  38. 65.
    Amoore, Louise and de Goode, Marieke (eds.). Risk and the War on Terror. Abingdon: Routledge, 2008.Google Scholar
  39. 67.
    Lawson, George. “Introduction: the ‘what’, ‘when’ and ‘where’ of the global 1989.” In The Global 1989: Continuity and Change in World Politics, edited by George Lawson, Chris Armbruster, and Michael Cox, 11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 68.
    Jackson. Civilizing the Enemy, 236 (with reference to Laffey, Mark and Weldes, Jutta. “Beyond Belief: Ideas and Symbolic Technologies in the Study of International Relations,” European Journal of International Relations 3(2) (1997): 209;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ringmar, Erik. Identity, interest and action: A Cultural Explanation of Sweden’s intervention in the Thirty Years War (74). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shotter, John. Cultural Politics 1993, 65–69: 170–171).Google Scholar
  43. 70.
    Guzzini, Stefano. “A Reconstruction of Constructivism in International Relations,” European Journal of International Relations 6(2) (2000): 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 71.
    Hopf, Ted. “The Promise of Constructivism in IR Theory,” International Security 23(1) (1998): 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 73.
    Inayatullah, Naeem and Blaney, David. International Relations and the Problems of Difference. New York: Routledge, 2004.Google Scholar
  46. 74.
    Campbell, David. Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity. Revised ed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998, 70.Google Scholar
  47. 75.
    Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. “Foregrounding ontology: dualism, monism, and IR theory,” Review of International Studies 34 (2008): 131.Google Scholar
  48. 79.
    Wilkinson, Paul. Terrorism versus Democracy: The Liberal State Response, 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2006, 88.Google Scholar
  49. 81.
    Crenshaw, Martha. “The Psychology of Terrorism: An Agenda for the 21st Century,” Political Psychology 21(2) (2000): 415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 82.
    English, Richard. Terrorism: How to respond. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, 56–117. “Amnesia” was also a discussion point at the “Belfast International Terrorism Workshop” (Queens University Belfast, 2009) and the British Academy Conference “9/11 Ten Years On” (British Academy, 2011).Google Scholar
  51. 83.
    David Campbell, “Time Is Broken: The Return of the Past In the Response to September 11,” Theory and Event 5, no. 4 (2002): paragraph 8.Google Scholar
  52. 85.
    English, Richard. Irish Freedom: A history of nationalism in Ireland. London: Pan Macmillan, 2006, 370;Google Scholar
  53. Guelke, Adrian. The Age of Terrorism and the International Political System. London: Tauris Publishers, 1995, 52.Google Scholar
  54. 86.
    Donohue, Laura. “Regulating Northern Ireland: The Special Powers Acts, 1922–1972,” The Historical Journal 41(4) (1998): 1089–1120;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Donohue, Laura. The Costs of Counterterrorism: Power, politics, and liberty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hogan, Gerard and Walker, Clive. Political Violence and the Law in Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1989;Google Scholar
  57. Walker, Clive. Blackstone’s Guide to the Anti-Terrorism Legislation. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
  58. 90.
    Lustick, Ian. “NO: Why terrorism is a much smaller threat than you think.” In Contemporary Debates on Terrorism, edited by Richard Jackson and Samuel Justin Sinclair, 74. London: Routledge, 2012.Google Scholar
  59. 92.
    Williams, Michael C. “Modernity, identity and security: a comment on the ‘Copenhagen controversy,” Review of International Studies 24 (1998): 439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 93.
    Jackson, Richard, Breen-Smyth, Marie, and Gunning, Jeroen (eds.). Critical Terrorism Studies: A New Research Agenda. London: Routledge, 2009;Google Scholar
  61. Jackson, Richard, Jarvis, Lee, Gunning, Jeroen, and Breen-Smyth, Marie. Terrorism: A Critical Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.Google Scholar
  62. 95.
    Shotter, John., Shotter, John. “Wittgenstein and our talk of feelings in inquiries into the dynamics of language use” International Journal of Critical Psychology (discontinued in 2008, now is journal Subjectivity) 21 (2007): 131. Thus there is a background “structure of possibilities” (Ibid., 136), but this background is not determinate or determining.Google Scholar
  63. 96.
    Kurki, Milja. Causation in International Relations: Reclaiming Causal Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. The account is in line with the idea of redefining cause and reclaiming causal analysis broadly speaking.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 97.
    Wendt, Alexander. “On constitution and causation in International Relations,” Review of International Studies 24(5) (1998): 104–105. A comparison here noted by Sherrill Stroschein is chess, as discussed by Friedrich Kratochwil (Rules, Norms, and Decisions: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) in which “the meaning of the move [‘check’] and its explanation crucially depend upon the knowledge of the rule-structure” (26).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 99.
    Balzacq, Thierry. “The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency, Audience and Context” European Journal of International Relations 11(2) (2005): 172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 100.
    Waever, Ole. “Identity, communities and foreign policy: discourse analysis as foreign policy theory.” In European integration and national identity: The challenge of the Nordic states, edited by Lene Hansen and Ole Waever, 44, note 15. London: Routledge, 2002.Google Scholar
  67. 101.
    Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of science and its implications for the study of world politics. London: Routledge, 2011, 135.Google Scholar
  68. 109.
    Gearty, Conor. Liberty & Security. Cambridge: Polity, 2013.Google Scholar
  69. 110.
    Amoore, Louise. “Vigilant Visualities: The Watchful Politics of the War on Terror,” Security Dialogue 38 (2007): 215–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 111.
    Tilly, Charles. Durable Inequality. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  71. 113.
    On “Islam” and fear, see Woods, Joshua. ‘Framing terror: an experimental framing effects study of the perceived threat of terrorism,’ Critical Studies on Terrorism 4(2) (2011), 199–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 114.
    Schneider, Cathy. “Police Power and Race Riots in Paris,” Politics and Society 36(1) (2008): 133–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kathryn Marie Fisher 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathryn Marie Fisher
    • 1
  1. 1.National Defense UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations