The Failure of Liberal Interventionism
Deconstructing Afghan Identity Discourses of “Modern” and “Tradition”
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13053633 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Aisha Younus (0000-0002-7224-5504, Quaid-i-Azam University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Publication date | 2023-12-22 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Politics and Governance (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2183-2463 • E-ISSN: 2183-2463 |
| Publisher | Cogitatio (PUBLISHER • PT) |
| DOI | 10.17645/pag.7380 |
| OpenAlex | W4390134882 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 21 |
In Afghanistan, the crisis of liberal intervention unfolded in the failure to establish democratic structures as a solution to terrorism and extremism in the aftermath of 9/11. Following the emergency withdrawal of US and NATO forces from Afghanistan on August 30, 2021, President Ashraf Ghani discreetly left Kabul, enabling the Taliban to regain control and form a new government in the country. The recurrent pattern of intervention and the subsequent return of the Taliban highlights a failure of the liberal project, which is a significant concern addressed in this article as the main question: Why has liberal intervention failed in Afghanistan? The answer lies in deconstructing the hegemonic discourse of “modern” Afghan to understand how it was resisted and replaced by the alternative discourse of “tradition,” subsequently, leading to the failure of the liberal project. The “modern” discourse, rooted in the US social context, aimed to civilise the perceived primitive and traditional Afghans. Conversely, the Taliban, drawing upon the Afghan social context, contested the “modern” discourse with an alternative discourse of “tradition” portraying liberals and their supporters as “occupiers” and “oppressors,” thus, justifying their armed resistance (jihad) against occupying forces. Framed within a critical social constructivism, the text, interviews, speeches, and statements of prominent Taliban leaders and the US presidents, apprise how specific identities have been employed to naturalise the “modern” discourse as justification for intervention. Critical discourse analysis explicates how the “tradition” discourse denaturalised the former and, subsequently, facilitated the establishment of the Taliban’s power in Afghanistan
Aesthetics · Afghan · Context (archaeology · Critical discourse analysis · Hegemony · Identity (music · Ideology · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Terrorism · Gender Studies · History · Law · Philosophy · Political Conflict and Governance · Politics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East · Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Afghanistan
Imagining Afghanistan
Connecting Histories in Afghanistan
American exceptionalism
The Impossibility of Society
Liberal Peace
The Concept of Cultural Hegemony
The Bush Doctrine
Liberal Internationalism 3.0
Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis
Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketization of Public Discourse
The Roots of the Bush Doctrine
Military adaptation and organisational convergence in war
Americar Ideals versus American Institutions
Afghanistan, Graveyard of Empires
| Citations per year | 0.67 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2023 - 2024 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |