ARGUING SECURITY: RHETORIC, MEDIA ENVIRONMENT, AND THREAT LEGITIMATION A Dissertation Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By Adam Lusk January, 2010 Examining Committee Members: Mark A. Pollack, Advisory Chair, Political Science Richard E. Deeg, Political Science Geoffrey L. Herrera, Swarthmore College Wesley W. Widmaier, External Member, St. Joseph’s University i ABSTRACT Arguing Security: Rhetoric, Media Environment, and Threat Legitimation Adam Lusk Doctor of Philosophy Temple University, 2010 Mark Pollack In this dissertation, I study the process of gaining public consent about a security threat, or threat legitimation. Threats require legitimation because they are social facts and not objective truths or subjective perceptions. I argue rhetorical resources and strategies affect threat legitimation. Political actors deploy rhetorical resources and strategies in order to generate consent. The rhetorical resources connect together the rhetorical resources to construct a threat narrative used in the public debates. Moreover, I argue that the media environment influences how rhetorical strategies affect threat legitimation, acting as a conditional variable. Therefore I trace the threat narratives in six episodes in the history of United States foreign policy. Through process tracing, I highlight how rhetorical resources and strategies changed the public debates and level of consent about a threat, and how the media environment influenced these rhetorical strategies. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I first want to acknowledge the effort and expertise provided by the committee members. Mark Pollack stepped in to serve as the committee chair, and steered this dissertation to completion. He read countless drafts and took my ideas seriously, even though this project was outside his comfort zone. Due to his comments and suggestions, this project is more theoretically and analytically sound, and I am a better scholar. Richard Deeg provided not only great suggestions, but also great friendship. Our weekly basketball games helped take my mind off the dissertation and provided some much needed exercise. Finally, Geoff Herrera served as a mentor in every sense. Geoff was the teacher that every graduate student wants and needs, challenging how I thought about international relations and pushing me to become a better student and scholar. I am ever grateful that he stayed with this project until the end. Like most graduate students, I am indebted to a larger circle of scholars than just my dissertation committee. First, Janice Bially Mattern opened my eyes to a different perspectives and encouraged me to pursue my ideas. I learned so much from her in such a short time. Just as important, she encouraged me to take part in the ISA-NE Interpretative and Relationship Workshop. It was at this workshop that I met Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Dan Nexon. Both of them provided fantastic comments that really shaped the direction of this project at an early stage. At subsequent conferences, I met a number of fellow graduate students and senior scholars who sharpened my thinking and arguments. Although they are too numerous to list here, I want to thank them all and I hope iii to return the favor. Moreover, I also want to thank fellow graduate students at Temple University. Discussions with them helped formulate and develop my thoughts about threats and political science in general. In particular, J.C. Rothermel and Sheri Sunderland always listened to my crazy ideas. They remain good friends and I look forward to many years of discussions. I am also grateful for the guidance of older graduate students, such as Darren Trippel, Justin Gollob, and Dan Dougherty. I also want to acknowledge the circle of friends and family that supported me throughout this process. All of my friends helped in their own special ways. In particular, I want to thank Pat and Erica Chilson. They took me in halfway through my first year in graduate school, and I will always be grateful for their generosity in my time of need. Moreover as this dissertation dragged on, Pat’s inappropriate phone messages and Erica’s badgering always made laugh. I also want to acknowledge the one person who truly appreciated my Roosevelt quotations, especially late on a Saturday night, Marcus Fennell. I also want to thank in no particular order, Matt Szapacs, Gerry Thorell, Rob Gill, Rob Norton, Vin Fortunato, Jeff Curry, Ed Troy, Randy MacDonald, Mike Hoffman, Kevin Blake, Sean O’Rourke, and Jeff Ferro for all making my life more better in some way. As for my family, I want to acknowledge that I could not have completed this process without any of them. To my Mom and Dad, you have always been there for me. I am always grateful for all that you have done for me and I hope to always make you proud. My brother Brian remains my best man. He often let me iv vent or just talk Yankee baseball when I needed a break. He is always there for me, and I will always be there for him. I also want to acknowledge my new family, who joined this process near the beginning. To Paree and Angel, I appreciate how you have accepted me and loved me. Seven years is a long time for a son-in-law to be in school! But you were always supportive and kind. I also want to thank my sister-in-law, Tamar Fumento, and her husband, Rob, and their beautiful children Nicholas and Alexander, as well as my brother-in-law, Ara Metjian, and his wife, Hili. They all have made my life more special. Finally, Talene Metjian was my partner for all of these years, and remains my true love. She supported me throughout this entire process, from entering graduate school to completing this dissertation. She made me laugh when I wanted to cry, made me happy when I was sad, gave me energy when I was tired, and inspired me to work when I wanted to quit. You continue to make me the happiest man in the world. Most importantly, she gave me a wonderful and beautiful daughter, Angel Rose. She is my inspiration for making this a better world. These past two years at home with you have been the most special time in my life so far. You may not remember them, but I will never forget them. Waking up at 5 am or staying up past midnight to write was always worth our playtime together that morning, and you always make my heart lighter and my spirit brighter. v DEDICATION For Talene and Angel Rose, with all of my love vi TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................................... iii DEDICATION .......................................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ viii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 2. THEORY AND RESEARCH DESIGN ......................................................... 23 3. CHILE AND SPAIN ..................................................................................... 59 4. GERMANY AND RUSSIA ......................................................................... 132 5. NICARAGUA AND PANAMA ................................................................... 209 6. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 265 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 270 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Germany Public Opinion ............................................................................. 139 2. Russia Public Opinion .................................................................................. 172 3. Nicaragua Public Opinion............................................................................ 214 4. Panama Public Opinion ............................................................................... 238 5. Television versus Newspaper Usage............................................................ 255 viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION In his memoirs, President Reagan comments that, “For eight years the press called me the ‘Great Communicator.’ Well, one of my greatest frustrations during those eight years was my inability to communicate to the American people and to Congress the seriousness of the threat we faced in Central America” (Reagan 1990; Edwards III 2003). These failures raise several important questions about threat, communication, and foreign policy. Why does a president succeed or fail at communicating a threat to the public? Numerous studies tell us that presidents hold vast amounts of institutional and political powers for public communication, especially concerning foreign policy events and issues (Tulis 1987; Hinckley 1994; Meernik 1994; Kernell 1986; Peterson 1994). Moreover, as noted by President Reagan, the abilities and skills of an individual president do not seem to determine successful threat communication. Even more important, why does a threat need to be communicated? Foreign policy decision makers, bureaucratic experts, journalists, politicians, and even academics reference threat in their speeches, papers, and discussions as if threat is self-evident. If any communication is needed, it is simply to draw public attention to an easily discernable reality. To begin to