Ideological Warfare: Bush-Era Realism in Captain America: Civil War
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
1 Ideological Warfare: Bush-era realism in Captain America: Civil War Abstract The 2016 Marvel billion-dollar blockbuster Captain America: Civil War (2016) sparked a nation-wide controversy over a simple premise: super-enhanced individuals fighting for humanity ought to be regulated by an overseeing international institution. The characters within the film -- and consequently the audience members -- are split between those who support institutional oversight and those who oppose it. The contentious ideologies of the superheroes spill over to the political dialogues over US international practices through veiled analogies to the US’s history of leaving collateral damage in the process of military foreign interventions (i.e. Vietnam, Venezuela, Afghanistan), and the US’s turbulent relationship with international security institutions since the 20th century. The film seemingly reflects the battles of modern day political culture concerning international cooperation, autonomy, and American identity by placing two opposing lenses in conversation with each other, with the outcomes of the characters defining a modern critique on 21st century US foreign diplomacy--specifically, those of the Bush administration during the Iraq War. Thus, my research investigates the extent to which Bush-era realism politics is reflected and supported by the characters in Captain America: Civil War. I hypothesize that the ideological narrative of Captain America: Civil War follows that of the debates over unilateralism and international cooperation within the executive branch and Congress regarding the Iraq War, and presents a critique on both ideologies as a statement against Bush politics. Though realism finds a moral victory in the film, both sides end up considerably worse off than before the conflict. These findings partially support my original hypothesis; although the film does align the two characters with the conflicting ideologies of the Bush administration and follows the Iraq War narrative by allowing realism to win out, it ultimately presents a critique on neither of the ideologies themselves, but rather on the fallout of war. 1. Introduction With a box office of 1.153 billion USD, the critically acclaimed Marvel film Captain America: Civil War (2016) introduces its storyline with Captain America, Black Widow, Falcon, and Scarlet Witch fighting a group of mercenaries attempting to steal a bio-warfare weapon in Lagos, Nigeria. As the leader of the mercenaries makes a last minute attempt to detonate a bomb, Scarlet Witch redirects the explosion from the local marketplace and inadvertently into an office building, causing multiple civilian deaths and injuries. With this jarring opening scene, the film 2 illustrates the cost of violent missions in foreign countries--actions often justified as necessary and peace-building. The Sokovian incident catalyzes the creation of the Sokovia Accords, a proposal presented by US Secretary of State Thaddeus Ross and approved by 117 countries to put the operations of the Avengers under the regulations and supervision of a UN panel. The Sokovia Accords were intended to limit the collateral damage left behind by the Avengers’ missions and to provide some sort of accountability for the super-enhanced group. Although the Russo brothers directors never explicitly state any international relations (IR) allegories within the film, the film uncannily mirrors the turbulent standing of the US’s role in international criminal justice. Captain America: Civil War presents a multitude of dichotomies mirroring tensions among international relations theorists: state action vs. inaction, international cooperation vs. state autonomy, liberalism vs. realism. In this film, the word superpower holds a double meaning: a reference to the superheros -- or, as the Secretary Ross calls them, “U.S.-based enhanced individuals who routinely ignore sovereign borders" -- and the collective analogy of the Avengers as the United States. This line of reasoning frames the political questions raised in Captain America: Civil War, as co-director Anthony Russo states that “[they] were very much thinking about the connection between superheroes and superpowers, meaning superpowers in the real world, the conventional idea. We live in a country where we do go over borders all the time and we do what we feel is necessary. And even though we have the best intentions behind what we're doing, there's still a cost to it” (Yu, 2016). After the Sokovia Accords are presented, Secretary Ross orders the Avengers to sign the Accords before the UN convenes to ratify the proposal, ultimately fracturing the Avengers team into two ideological teams led by Captain America and Iron Man. Iron Man advocates for the supervision of the Avengers under the UN branch, wary of his unchecked autonomy and guilt-tripped by the collateral damage of their last mission. On the other hand, Captain America opposes the restrictions placed by the Accords, believing that the safest and most trustworthy hands to bring global peace and safety are their own. The contentious ideologies of the superheroes reflect the battles of modern day political culture concerning international cooperation, autonomy, and American identity. This conflict between US unilateralism and international cooperation has presented itself since President Wilson’s proposal of the creation of the League of Nations; since then, the US’s turbulent relationship with international security institutions has manifested in divisive approaches to international relations. Two forms of thought arose within US policymakers; one supporting US collaboration and cooperation with foreign countries to construct law-keeping international institutions, and the other opposing the restraint of the US in international security by the aforementioned institutions. These two ideologies, liberalism and realism respectively, dictated American foreign policy throughout the 20th century until the culmination of the debates during the Iraq War, when the US unilaterally invaded Iraq against the warning of the UN. A brief overview of the two international relations paradigms: realism theory is a dominant school of thought in international relations theory emphasizing competition and conflict. Realism is identified through the assumption of humans’ violent natural state and the prioritization of state autonomy. Comparatively, liberalism is another dominant school of thought in international relations theory emphasizing mutual cooperation and peace-building, 3 often contrasted with realism. The liberal paradigm is identified by the belief in the betterment of international relations through international cooperation. (Korab-Karpowicz, 2018) In the months leading up to and during the Iraq War, these two paradigms split Congress, the executive branch, and American voters. Notable Senators Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders prescribed to the tenets of liberalism, voting against the Iraq invasion. Meanwhile, realists within President Bush’s administration advocated for intervention regardless of UN approval (Kubbig et al., 2000). The original comic storywriter of Captain America: Civil War Frank Millar admits that he was thinking about the US invasion of Iraq, as well as the aftermath of 9/11 and the Patriot Act, when he began writing the original storyline in 2004, during the middle of the Bush presidency. The film is incomparably intertwined with the political anxieties of the post-911 world, utilizing the ideological conflicts between the characters as a means of achieving a greater understanding of the US’s complicated relationship with international security institutions such as the UN and the International Criminal Court (ICC) (Haltiwanger, 2016). The potential of examining superhero popular culture to explain international relations phenomena must be further explored to deepen our understanding of the dichotomies of international security affairs through their interactions with one another. The intertwining of film culture and politics in Captain America: Civil War provides an opportunity to consider a hypothetical case study how US hegemony and exceptionalism and its balance with international cooperation is portrayed to the American public, prompting a closer look into the lasting legacy of the Bush Doctrine in US foreign policy and its portrayal to the American public. Thus, my research investigates the extent to which Bush-era realism politics is reflected and supported by the characters in Captain America: Civil War. Based on my observations, I hypothesize that the ideological narrative of Captain America: Civil War follows that of the debates over unilateralism and international cooperation within the executive branch and Congress regarding the Iraq War, and presents a critique on both ideologies as a statement against Bush politics. 2. Literature Review The potential in using popular culture as a cultural measure has been a recent interest in political science and international relations. Engert and Spencer discuss four ways in which film can be utilized in the classroom as a pedagogical tool: to teach events, issues, cultures, and theories. Incorporating films into the international relations classroom curriculum serves to advance understanding by presenting theories, cultures, and history. By creating a personal identification with a political actor, audience members are “led to empathize, consider the scope of manoeuvre the actors involved may have and reflect on the choices as well as on the