{"title":"暴力如何在战争行动的叙述中消失/出现:一个概念框架","authors":"Tua Sandman","doi":"10.1080/23337486.2021.1985288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The present article advances a conceptual framework for the critical study of the representation of war and military violence. Essentially, it offers a conceptualization of dis/appearances of violence in public discourse, which combines the concepts of in/visibilization, de/naturalization, and dis/identification. Though they overlap and interweave in terms of what they capture, all three are considered relevant to fully elaborate how violence may dis/appear in narratives on war-like operations. Furthermore, the article exemplifies how one may make use of the conceptual framework, by exploring the representation of violence in Swedish public political debate at the time of active engagement in peace-enforcement and offensive military operations. More specifically, the empirical illustration critically examines the parliamentary debates on ONUC in Congo 1960–1964 and ISAF in Afghanistan 2002–2014. The analysis reveals and details how violence continuously tends to disappear as a reality, as a dilemma and/or as Sweden’s own practice and choice. At present, the scholarly debate mainly focuses on the US or the UK. To advance our understanding of the ways in which violence is normalized and made possible, we need refined conceptual tools that allow us to explore the complexity and political work of representations of war and violence in various contexts.","PeriodicalId":37527,"journal":{"name":"Critical Military Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How violence dis/appears in narratives on war-like operations: a conceptual framework\",\"authors\":\"Tua Sandman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23337486.2021.1985288\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The present article advances a conceptual framework for the critical study of the representation of war and military violence. Essentially, it offers a conceptualization of dis/appearances of violence in public discourse, which combines the concepts of in/visibilization, de/naturalization, and dis/identification. Though they overlap and interweave in terms of what they capture, all three are considered relevant to fully elaborate how violence may dis/appear in narratives on war-like operations. Furthermore, the article exemplifies how one may make use of the conceptual framework, by exploring the representation of violence in Swedish public political debate at the time of active engagement in peace-enforcement and offensive military operations. More specifically, the empirical illustration critically examines the parliamentary debates on ONUC in Congo 1960–1964 and ISAF in Afghanistan 2002–2014. The analysis reveals and details how violence continuously tends to disappear as a reality, as a dilemma and/or as Sweden’s own practice and choice. At present, the scholarly debate mainly focuses on the US or the UK. To advance our understanding of the ways in which violence is normalized and made possible, we need refined conceptual tools that allow us to explore the complexity and political work of representations of war and violence in various contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Military Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Military Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23337486.2021.1985288\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Military Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23337486.2021.1985288","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
How violence dis/appears in narratives on war-like operations: a conceptual framework
ABSTRACT The present article advances a conceptual framework for the critical study of the representation of war and military violence. Essentially, it offers a conceptualization of dis/appearances of violence in public discourse, which combines the concepts of in/visibilization, de/naturalization, and dis/identification. Though they overlap and interweave in terms of what they capture, all three are considered relevant to fully elaborate how violence may dis/appear in narratives on war-like operations. Furthermore, the article exemplifies how one may make use of the conceptual framework, by exploring the representation of violence in Swedish public political debate at the time of active engagement in peace-enforcement and offensive military operations. More specifically, the empirical illustration critically examines the parliamentary debates on ONUC in Congo 1960–1964 and ISAF in Afghanistan 2002–2014. The analysis reveals and details how violence continuously tends to disappear as a reality, as a dilemma and/or as Sweden’s own practice and choice. At present, the scholarly debate mainly focuses on the US or the UK. To advance our understanding of the ways in which violence is normalized and made possible, we need refined conceptual tools that allow us to explore the complexity and political work of representations of war and violence in various contexts.
期刊介绍:
Critical Military Studies provides a rigorous, innovative platform for interdisciplinary debate on the operation of military power. It encourages the interrogation and destabilization of often taken-for-granted categories related to the military, militarism and militarization. It especially welcomes original thinking on contradictions and tensions central to the ways in which military institutions and military power work, how such tensions are reproduced within different societies and geopolitical arenas, and within and beyond academic discourse. Contributions on experiences of militarization among groups and individuals, and in hitherto underexplored, perhaps even seemingly ‘non-military’ settings are also encouraged. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and, if found suitable for further consideration, to double-blind peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees. The Journal also includes a non-peer reviewed section, Encounters, showcasing multidisciplinary forms of critique such as film and photography, and engaging with policy debates and activism.