| ID | 157744 |
| Title Proper | Obama administration’s conceptual change |
| Other Title Information | Imminence and the legitimation of targeted killings |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Trenta, Luca |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Starting in 2010, the Obama administration engaged in an effort to justify drone strikes relying on the concept of ‘imminence’. The aim of this article is to understand the reasons behind such insistence and to assess the administration’s efforts at conceptual change. Building on Skinner’s and Bentley’s work, the article argues that the administration has followed an ‘innovating ideologist’ strategy. The analysis shows how waves of criticisms exposed the administration to a key contradiction between its rhetoric of change that emphasised international law and the need for aggressive counterterrorism. Reacting to this criticism, the administration has relied on imminence due to its connection with legitimate uses of force, while working to change the criteria for the concept, causing a shift away from imminent as ‘immediate.’ Reassessing Skinner’s place in IR, the article identifies conceptual change as a lens to assess foreign policy rhetoric and practice. The analysis emphasises the connection between actors’ intentions, beliefs, and practices. It highlights the importance of criticism in engendering contradictions, exploring why only some criticisms are confronted. Finally, the article develops an original typology of the limits confronted by the innovating ideologist and methods to assess whether the actor has respected them. |
| `In' analytical Note | European Journal of International Security Vol. 3, No.1; Feb 2018: p.69-93 |
| Journal Source | European Journal of International Security Vol: 3 No 1 |
| Key Words | Obama ; Conceptual Change ; Drones ; Imminence ; Skinner |