Bettiza Phd Complete Draft2 August 30
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE THE GLOBAL RESURGENCE OF RELIGION AND THE DESECULARIZATION OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY, 1990-2012 Gregorio Bettiza A thesis submitted to the Department of International Relations of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, August 2012 DECLARATION I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgment is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorization does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. Signature: Date: I declare that my thesis consists of 99,140 words 2 ABSTRACT This thesis conceptually and empirically explores how American foreign policy is changing under the domestic and international pressures brought about by social and cultural processes associated with the global resurgence of religion. It argues that in response to these pressures the American foreign policy establishment, and American diplomatic, foreign assistance and national security practices and institutions are gradually undergoing, since the end of the Cold War and especially following September 11, processes of “desecularization”. In order to explain these foreign policy changes, this thesis develops a Historical Sociological (HS) approach to Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA). This theoretical framework allows investigating the complex causal mechanisms that have led to the emergence of “desecularizing actors” at the domestic American level, which are embedded or responding to macro-processes of religious resurgence at home and abroad. These desecularizing actors have mobilized at the micro-level to challenge at critical historical junctures what they perceive is the problematic secular character of American foreign policy intellectual traditions, state practices and policy-making structures. In order to advance their preferred inherently religious policy agendas, desecularizing actors have articulated a number of principled and strategic discourses, which enable them to successfully contest and renegotiate the boundaries between “the secular” and “the religious” in American foreign policy. This thesis draws from ongoing conceptual debates in the sociology of religion on desecularization and applies this concept to that of a state’s foreign policy. It unpacks how processes of desecularization have taken place at multiple levels and with different intensities across the American foreign policy apparatus. This thesis identifies two broad processes that relate to foreign policy desecularization. First, processes of “counter- secularization” in terms of a growing entanglement between functionally differentiated American secular state practices and policy-making structures, and religious norms and actors. Second, processes of “counter-secularism” in terms of a progressive weakening of dominant secular epistemic, ideological, and normative ideational constructs among American policy-makers. 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Writing a doctoral thesis is a long and arduous, but incredibly fulfilling process, which would have never come to fruition without a great deal of financial, intellectual and moral support I received along the way. First of all this thesis would not have been possible without the full funding received by the LSE IDEAS Stonex Scholarship and by LSE IR department’s travel grants to carry out fieldwork in the U.S. in 2010 and 2011. I would also like to extend my thanks to the Center for Transatlantic Relations at SAIS, Johns Hopkins, for giving me an air conditioned desk in the unbearably humid Washington, D.C. summer of 2011. I am also grateful to Emiliano Alessandri and Mesky Brhane for offering me a spare bed during my time in Washington. Emiliano, in particular, has been an important friend and intellectual partner throughout these years. My deepest gratitude goes to my supervisor, Katerina Dalacoura, for her unfailing support, patience, kindness, and mentorship. Her analytical rigor, open-mindedness and ability to challenge assumptions have been an incredible source of inspiration throughout the process. My thanks also go to colleagues and friends at LSE IDEAS and the IR502 International Theory Workshop whose insights throughout the years I’ve benefitted enormously from. Special thanks go to (in alphabetical order) Kirsten Ainley, Barry Buzan, Michael Cox, Kim Hutchings, Nick Kitchen, Svetozar Rajak, and Arne Westad. Thanks must go to Emilia Knight, Martina Langer, Tiha Franulovic and Hilary Parker for their ever-present behind the scenes support. My interest in IR as a discipline developed by accident while attending Mervyn Frost’s lectures at King’s College, London, many years ago. The seed that became this PhD was planted then, and for that I am grateful to him. I am especially grateful to Amnon Aran, Alex Edwards, Jim Guth, George Lawson, Elizabeth Prodromou and Nukhet Sandal who took time to read and comment on parts of my work. I am also grateful to the many NGO and faith-based activists, religious leaders, policy analysts, academics, U.S. government officials who took time to meet with me in Washington D.C. and discuss the issues raised by my research. Needless to say, I am entirely responsible for the content and conclusions of this thesis. Crucial to the development of this thesis, have been the countless debates during lunches, coffees, and pints with my Millennium and Research Room friends from the “IRD 7th Floor”. A huge thanks goes to Manuel Almeida, Filippo Dionigi, Rebekka Friedman, Andrew Jillions, Jorge Lasmar, Kevork Oskanian, Ramon “Moncho” Pacheco Pardo, and Chris Phillips. Thanks must go to Piero as well, who’s panini e caffè kept me alive and going in the final deepest and loneliest moments of this doctorate. Loving thanks go to my family, especially to my mother, Ludina, for her endless support throughout my life. Above all, though, my most heart-felt and deepest gratitude goes to Katie, who has had to put up with my physical and mental absence throughout most of our married life thus far. Without her constant love, reassuring encouragement, “date nights”, and dreams of a life beyond the PhD, this thesis would not exist. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 9 The Argument .............................................................................................................. 13 Defining Key Concepts ................................................................................................ 17 Religion ...................................................................................................................... 17 Global Resurgence of Religion .................................................................................. 19 The Secular and Desecularization ............................................................................. 28 Empirical and Conceptual Contributions of the Thesis .......................................... 31 Theoretical Framework: A Historical Sociological Approach to Foreign Policy Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 38 Methodology and Thesis Structure ............................................................................ 41 1. EXPLAINING FOREIGN POLICY CHANGE: A HISTORICAL SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH TO FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 49 Understanding and Explaining Change in FPA: An Incomplete Research Agenda ....................................................................................................................................... 52 Why the Under-theorization of Change in FPA ....................................................... 54 Bringing More IR Theory into FPA .......................................................................... 57 HS and FPA I: Towards a Pluralist and Historicist Conceptualization of the International in FPA ................................................................................................... 63 Analytical and Ontological Pluralism ....................................................................... 63 Historicism and Eventfulness .................................................................................... 66 From Theory to Empirics .......................................................................................... 67 HS and FPA II: Towards a Mutually Constitutive Understanding of Foreign Policy and International Politics ................................................................................ 70 Linking Macro Processes and Micro Social Action .................................................. 71 The Institutional Concept of the State ....................................................................... 75 From Theory to Empirics .......................................................................................... 80 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................