Societies Without Borders

This paper contributes to the sociological study of legitimation, specifically focusing on the state legitimation of torture and other forms of violence that violate international normative standards. While sociologists have identified important discursive techniques of legitimation, this paper suggests that researchers should also look at state practices where concerns regarding legitimacy are “built in” to the very practice of certain forms of violence. Specifically, the paper focuses on surrogacy, through which powerful states may direct or benefit from the violence carried out by client states or other armed groups while at the same time attempting to appear separate from and blameless regarding any resulting human rights violations. The utility of this concept is demonstrated in case studies of torture in the U.S. “War on Terror,” examining the policy of extraordinary rendition and U.S. policy regarding Iraqi-state torture during its occupation of that nation. The case studies are developed from analyses of human rights reports, leaked military documents from U.S. soldiers in the Iraq War, and U.S. newspaper and television coverage.

View full text of the article.

Volume 7, Issue 2

28 August 2012

Societies Without Borders

Human Rights and the Social Sciences

Volume 7, Issue 2

Edited by David L. Brunsma, Keri E. Iyall Smith, and Mark Frezzo Book Review Editor, Tugrul Keskin
Editorial Assistant, Brian Gresham

Articles

NANCY A. MATTHEWS, NORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY

“Learning the Truth and Stating the Facts”: US State Department Claims-Making and the Construction of “Human Rights”

DAMAYANTI BANERJEE, UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE— KNOXVILLE

Just Places: Creating a Space for Place in Environmental Justice

LISA HAJJAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA—SANTA BARBARA

Wikileaking the Truth about American Unaccountability for Torture

Symposium

MARK FREZZO, THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI; JUDITH BLAU, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA—CHAPEL HILL; LOUIS EDGAR ESPARZA, CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY—LOS ANGELES; DAVITA SILFEN GLASBERG, UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT; BRUCE K. FRIESEN, UNIVERSITY OF TAMPA

Symposium on the Implications of the ASA Human Rights Statement for Research, Teaching and Service

Notes From the Field

BARRET KATUNA, UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT

The Human Rights Enterprise and Women’s Rights Organizing

Book Reviews

AMINA ZARRUGH, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN

Review of Fallgirls: Gender and the Framing of Torture at Abu Ghraib by Ryan Ashley Caldwell

SIKANDAR TANGI, PESHAWAR UNIVERSITY

Review of Inside Al-Qaeda and the Taliban: Beyond Bin Laden and the 9/11 by Saleem Shahzad

ADVANCE RELEASE: “Learning the Truth and Stating the Facts”: US State Department Claims-Making and the Construction of “Human Rights”

30 July 2012

Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 132-164 (32)

Author: MATTHEWS, Nancy A.

Official US discourse claims US leadership and benevolence in promoting human rights worldwide. But US action on human rights is more complicated and paradoxical. My aim is to problematize “human rights” in particular discursive contexts in order to discover what is encompassed by this set of concepts and how the discourse about human rights exposes the relations of ruling (Smith 1990). I examine the discourse of the powerful, i.e., the US State Department in its Annual Country Reports on Human Rights. The repetition of facts, assertions, and ideas by a hegemonic institution constructs a reality that is difficult to counter. Several overarching themes run through State Department discourse that reflect core national ideologies of the United States: 1) American values as universal values; 2) the United States as a benevolent member of the human rights community; and 3) the United States as a world leader in human rights. The US stance on human rights is frequently a servant to its own security and strategic interests, including the neoliberal global project.

View the full text of the article.