Sly Civility and Institutionalized Humiliation

Mathur, Ritu

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-44943-8_4

Ritu Mathur²

201 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter exposes the vulnerability of the existing nuclear order. The subtle but radical shift in discourses deploying stereotypes for more than a century toward practices of sly civility to constitute a constitutional nuclear order exposes the tenuousness of such an arrangement. The meaning of vulnerability here is not simply in terms of the destructive power of nuclear weaponry but the ethnocentrism that pervades practices of sly civility associated with nuclear testing. It is this racial etiquette that masks vulnerabilities and inequalities by articulating abstract structural assumptions about security in the world order that serves as a premise for negotiating and validating particular arms control agreements such as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Contemporary efforts to question the premise of this constitutional nuclear order or acquire nuclear weapons technology are often met with imposition of punitive measures supplemented with ridicule to dismiss the decorative savages that refuse to conform and comply with existing taboos and norms of weapons control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

eBook: USD 16.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Richard J. Peterson, “Human Rights: Historical Learning in the Shadow of Violence,”The American Journal of Economics and Sociology 68, no. 1(2009): 258.
2.
Peterson, “Human Rights,” 259.
3.
Peterson, “Human Rights,” 259, 266.
4.
Peterson, “Human Rights,” 261.
5.
Peterson, “Human Rights,” 261, 259.
6.
Short and Kambouri, “Ambiguous universalism,” 274; Etienne Balibar, “Racism and Nationalism,” 50.
7.
Short and Kambouri, “Ambiguous universalism,” 274.
8.
Etienne Balibar, “Racism Revisited: Sources, Relevance, and Aporias of a Modern Concept,”PMLA 123, no. 5(2008): 1636.
9.
Short and Kambouri, “Ambiguous universalism,” 274.
10.
Jonathan Schell, “The Abolition I—defining the great predicament,”The New Yorker, January 2, 1984, 444, quoted and cited by Kerckhove, “On Nuclear Communication,” 71–81.
11.
Bhabha, The Location of Culture,175; Furedi, The Silent War, 14.
12.
Hannah Arendt, “Race thinking before Racism”, The Review of Politics 6, no. 1(1944): 49.
13.
Furedi, The Silent War, 15.
14.
Randolph B. Persaud and R.B.J. Walker, “Apertura: Race in International Relations,”Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 26, no. 4(2001): 373–374; Furedi, The Silent War, 5.
15.
G. John Ikenberry, After Victory—Institutions, Strategic Restraint and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars(Princeton & Oxford: Princeton university Press, 2001), 29.
16.
Ikenberry, After Victory,56–57.
17.
Short and Kambouri, “Ambiguous universalism,” 270.
18.
Short and Kambouri, “Ambiguous universalism,” 271; R.J. Vincent, “Race in International Relations,”International Affairs 58, no. 4(1982): 331–356; Robert J. Vitalis, “The Graceful and Generous Liberal Gesture: Making Racism Invisible in American International Relations,”Millennium 29, no. 2(2000): 331–356; Robert Vitalis, “Birth of a Discipline,” in Imperialism and Internationalism in the Discipline of International Relations, ed. David Long and Brian C. Schmidt (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005).
19.
Furedi, The Silent War, 19; Checkland, Humanitarianism and the Emperor’s Japan, 179.
20.
Nandy, The Intimate Enemy, xi.
21.
Nandy, The Intimate Enemy, xi.
22.
Nandy, The Intimate Enemy, xiii.
23.
Ikenberry, After Victory, 23. Ikenberry defines ‘political order’ as a governing arrangement comprising of rules, principles and institutions that define the core relationships between states that are party to the order; Short and Kambouri, “Ambiguous universalism,” 270.
24.
Furedi, The Silent War, 23–24.
25.
Furedi, The Silent War, 110.
26.
Gabrielle Hecht, “Introduction,” in Entangled Geographies: Empire and Technopolitics in the Global Cold War, ed. Gabrielle Hecht (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2011), 4–5.
27.
Ikenberry, After Victory, 163.
28.
Robert Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors: Military Colonialism in Nuclear Test Site Selection during the Cold War,”Asian Journal of Peacebuilding 1, no. 2(2013): 160.
29.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 173.
30.
Furedi, The Silent War, 114.
31.
Furedi, The Silent War, 209, see footnote 39.
32.
Tilman A. Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact and Implications of Nuclear Test Explosions in the Pacific Region,”International Review of the Red Cross 97, no. 889 (2015): 777–778, 793.
33.
Matthew Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific’: Oceanic diplomacy in the 2017 treaty for the prohibition of nuclear weapons,”Asian Journal of Political Science 26, no. 3(2018): 376.
34.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 776.
35.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 776.
36.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 779.
37.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 799.
38.
Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific,’” 372.
39.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 778.
40.
Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific,’” 377; N. Maclellan and J. Chesneauix, After Moruroa: France in the South Pacific(Melbourne, Australia: Ocean Press, 1998).
41.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,”160.
42.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 159.
43.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 160.
44.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 165.
45.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 166; Carole Gallagher, American Ground Zero: The Secret Nuclear War (New York: Random House, 1993), xxiii.
46.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 171; Stewart Firth, Nuclear Playground(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1987).
47.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 778.
48.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 778, see footnote 12; “Danger Area,” paper by Air Vice-Marshal W. E. Oulton, November 19,1956, No. GRA/TS.1008/1/Air; minutes of meeting on November 27,1956, marked Top Secret – UK Eyes Only, XY/181/024, cited in NicMaclellan, “Grappling with the Bomb: Opposition to Pacific Nuclear Testing in the 1950s”, in the Proceedings of the 14th Biennial Labour History Conference,eds. Phillip Deery and Julie Kimber (AustralianSociety for the Study of Labour History, Melbourne, 2015), 11.
49.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 168–169.
50.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 169.
51.
Frederick Warner and René J.C. Kirchmann(eds), Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) of the International Council for Science, SCOPE 59. Nuclear Test Explosions: Environmental and Human Impacts (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1999), 19–22; Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 777–778.
52.
Matthew Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific,’” 376; Robert Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 157–177.
53.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 158; Jack Neidenthal, For the Good of Mankind: A History of the People of Bikini and Their Islands (Majuro: Bravo Publishers, 2001), 2; Martha Smith-Norris, “‘Only as Dust in the Face of the Wind’: An Analysis of the BRAVO Nuclear Incident in the Pacific,1954,”The Journal of American-East Asian Relations 6, no. 1(1997): 18, 20.
54.
Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 158, 170–172; Jane Dibblin, Day of Two Suns: US Nuclear Testing and the Pacific Islanders(New York: New Amsterdam Books,1988), 20.
55.
Smith-Norris, “‘Only as Dust in the Face of the Wind,’”6.
56.
Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific,’”376; W. Hickel, Who Owns America? (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1971), 208; Jacobs, “Nuclear Conquistadors,” 174; David Vine, Islands of Shame: The History of the US Military Base on Diego Garcia (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009), 183.
57.
Smith-Norris, “‘Only as Dust in the Face of the Wind,’” 12.
58.
Mervyn O’Driscoll, “Diplomatic Triangles, the United Nations and the Problem of French Nuclear Testing, 1959–1960”, Journal of Cold War Studies 11, no. 1(2009): 28–56, retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/259184
59.
O’Driscoll, “Diplomatic Triangles.”
60.
Richard Scott, “A Ban on Nuclear Tests: The Course of Negotiations, 1958–1962,”International Affairs 38, no. 4(1962): 503.
61.
O’Driscoll, “Diplomatic Triangles,” retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/259184
62.
O’Driscoll, “Diplomatic Triangles.” retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/259184
63.
O’Driscoll, “Diplomatic Triangles.” Martha Smith-Norris, “‘Only as Dust in the Face of the Wind’” 33.
64.
O’Driscoll, “Diplomatic Triangles.” retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/259184
65.
Ministry of External Affairs India, ‘Stand-still Agreement’ Statement, Jawaharlal Nehru in the Indian Lok Sabha, April 2, 1954, document retrieved from meaindia.nic.in; see Office of the Special Assistant for National Security Affairs, White House Office, Memo, June 23, 1954, NSC Series, DDE Library.
66.
Richard Scott, “A Ban on Nuclear Tests: The Course of Negotiations, 1958–1962,”International Affairs 38, no. 4(1962): 509.
67.
Scott, “A Ban on Nuclear Tests,” 509.
68.
Joseph L. Nogee, “The Neutralist World and Disarmament Negotiations,”The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 362, no. not available (1965): 75. The neutralist representation at the UN Eighteen-Nation Disarmament Conference, comprised of Brazil, Burma, Ethiopia, India, Mexico, Nigeria, Sweden and the United Arab Republic (UAR).
69.
Nogee, “The Neutralist World,” 74.
70.
Nogee, “The Neutralist World,” 74.
71.
Nogee, “The Neutralist World,” 79.
72.
Nogee, “The Neutralist World,” 79.
73.
Henry A. Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing and the Problem of Peace,”Foreign Affairs 37, no. 1(1958): 8.
74.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”2.
75.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”1–18.
76.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”1.
77.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,” 17.
78.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,” 18.
79.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,” 17.
80.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”7,8.
81.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”1.
82.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”3.
83.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”3.
84.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,” 14.
85.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”4,6.
86.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”4.
87.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,”9.
88.
Kissinger, “Nuclear Testing,” 16.
89.
Bertrand Goldschmidt, “A Historical Survey of Nonproliferation Policies,”International Security 2, no. 1(1997): 76.
90.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 796–797, see footnote 106; NicMaclellan, “The Long Shadow of Bravo,”Inside Story, February 24, 2014, http://insidestory.org.au/the-long-shadow-of-bravo; Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Implications for Human Rights of the Environmentally Sound Management and Disposal of Hazardous Substances and Wastes, CalinGeorgescu, Addendum, Mission to the Marshall Islands (27– 30 March 2012) and the United States of America (24–27 April 2012), UN Doc. A/HRC/21/48/Add.1, September 3, 2012, p. 4, para. 10, pp. 10–15.
91.
Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific,’” 373.
92.
Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific,’” 383.
93.
J.C. Scott, Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1990), 55.
94.
Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific,’” 373.
95.
Alicia Sanders-Zakre, “Marshall Islands Lose Nuclear Cases,”Arms Control Today 46, no. 9(2016): 32.
96.
Matthew Bolton, “The ‘-Pacific’ part of ‘Asia-Pacific,’” 381.
97.
Ruff, “The Humanitarian Impact,” 788.
98.
Karl W. Deutsch, “The Impact of Science and Technology on International Politics,”Daedalus 88, no. 4(1959): 669, 672.
99.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 28.
100.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 29.
101.
CiroZoppo, “Nuclear Technology, Weapons, and the Third World,”Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, no. 386 (1969): 119.
102.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 35.
103.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 29.
104.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 29.
105.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 29.
106.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 100.
107.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 101.
108.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 100.
109.
Bhabha, The Location of Culture, 126.
110.
Salter, Barbarians & Civilization, 118. Also see Roxanne Doty for exact quotation as cited by Salter in footnote 22.
111.
Salter, Barbarians & Civilization, 125–126.
112.
Quote cited in G. John Ikenberry, After Victory, 169, fn10; “Memorandum by the Director of the Policy Planning Staff (Kennan) to the Secretary of State and Under Secretary of State (Lovett),”February 24,1948, Office of the Historian, Foreign Relations of the United States,Vol.1, 1948, 524.
113.
Karl W. Deutsch, “The Impact of Science and Technology on International Politics,”Daedalus 88, no. 4(1959): 681.
114.
Ikenberry, After Victory,193, 195.
115.
Arendt, “Race-Thinking,” 62.
116.
Arendt, “Race-Thinking,” 63, 70.
117.
Jackson, Civilizing the Enemy, 56–57.
118.
Jackson, Civilizing the Enemy, 110.
119.
Jackson, Civilizing the Enemy, 57.
120.
Anand, New States and International Law, 52.
121.
Anand, New States and International Law, 8, see footnote 10; J.H.W. Verzijl, “Western European Influence on the Foundations of International Law,” in his International Law in Historical Perspective (Leyden, 1968), 435–436.
122.
Anand, New States and International Law, 9. see footnote 14; Verzijl, “Western European Influence,” 443.
123.
Anand, New States and International Law, 20.
124.
Anand, New States and International Law, 20, see footnote 53; C.H. Alexandrowicz, “Grotius and India,”Indian Yearbook of International Affairs 3, no. 30 (1954): 164.
125.
Anand, New States and International Law, 51; W. Friedman, “United States Policy and the Crisis of International Law,”American Journal of International Law 59(1965): 858; W. Friedmann, “Half a Century of International Law,”Virginia Law Review 50, no. 8(1964): 1377.
126.
Anand, New States and International Law, 51, see footnote 24; O.J. Lissitzyn, “International Law in a Divided World,”International Conciliation, no. 542 (1963): 57–58; Wolfgang Friedmann, The Changing Structure of International Law (New York: Columbia University Press; London: Steven & Sons, 1964), 302; A.A. Fatouros, “Participation of the ‘New’ States in the International Legal Order of the Future,” in The Future of the International Legal Order, Vol. I, R.A. Falk and Cyril E. Black(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 349–350.
127.
Anand, New States and International Law, 49; F.S.C. Northrop, Taming of the Nations(New York, 1952), pp. 80–81,88.
128.
Anand, New States and International Law, 49–50.
129.
Anand, New States and International Law, 67, see footnote 85; B.V.A. Roling, International Law in an Expanded World (Amsterdam, 1960), 68.
130.
Anand, New States and International Law, 66–67.
131.
Anand, New States and International Law, 25.
132.
Anand, New States and International Law, 77.
133.
Anand, New States and International Law, 75.
134.
Anand, New States and International Law, 70; D.P. O’Connel, “Independence and Problems of State Succession,” in The New Nations in International Law and Diplomacy, William V.O’Brien (New York, 1965), 12–13.
135.
Gopal Guru, “Rejection of Rejection,” in Humiliation-Claims and Context, ed. Gopal Guru (Oxford, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 216.
136.
Anand, New States and International Law(Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.,1972), 62.
137.
Anand, New States and International Law, 84.
138.
Anand, New States and International Law, 62–63.
139.
Anand, New States and International Law, 11–12, 116.
140.
Anand, New States and International Law, 75.
141.
Robert O’Neil and David N. Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control (New York: St.Martin’s Press, 1987), 192 (italics inserted); Hedley Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”International Security 1, no. 1(1976): 3–36.
142.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control, 192; Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”3–36.
143.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control (New York: St.Martin’s Press, 1987), 192–193; Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”3–36.
144.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control,192–193; Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”3–36.
145.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control,191; Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”3–36.
146.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control,195 (italics inserted); Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”3–36.
147.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control,196 (italics inserted); Hedley Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”3–36.
148.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control, 214 (italics inserted); Hedley Bull, “The Role of the Nuclear Powers in the Management of Nuclear Proliferation,” in Arms Control for the Late Sixties, ed. James Ed. Dougherty and J.F. Lehman Jr.(D.Van Nostrand Co, 1968), 143–150.
149.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control, 191; Bull, “Arms control,”3–36.
150.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control, 191; Hedley Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”International Security 1, no. 1(Summer 1976): 3–36.
151.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control,196 (italics inserted); Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”3–36.
152.
O’Neil and Schwartz, Hedley Bull on Arms Control, 201–202 (italics inserted); Bull, “Arms control and World Order,”3–36.
153.
Furedi, The Silent War, 134, 153.
154.
Barry Buzan, An Introduction to Strategic Studies (London: Macmillan for the International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1987), 253; Croft, Strategies of Arms Control, 34.
155.
E.H. Carr, What Is History?148–149.
156.
Mutimer, The Weapons State, 37–43.
157.
Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1979), 118.
158.
Abraham, “‘Who’s Next?’”, 50.
159.
Mutimer, “Reimagining Security,” 28.
160.
Mutimer, “Reimagining Security,” 29.
161.
Mutimer, “Reimagining Security,” 33.
162.
Biswas, Nuclear Desire, 179.
163.
Biswas, Nuclear Desire, 179.
164.
Latham, “Constructing national security,” 130.
165.
Guru, “Theorizing Humiliation,” 11.
166.
O’Hagan, Conceptualizing the West, 32, 24.
167.
O’Hagan, Conceptualizing the West, 22–23.
168.
O’Hagan, Conceptualizing the West, 87, 103–104.
169.
James G. Ferguson, “Of Mimicry and Membership: Africans and the ‘New World Society,’”Cultural Anthropology 17, no. 4(2002): 561.
170.
De Kerckhove, “On Nuclear Communication,” 78.
171.
De Kerckhove, “On Nuclear Communication,”79.
172.
Guru, “Theorizing Humiliation,” 12.
173.
Guru, “Theorizing Humiliation,” 12.
174.
Guru, “Theorizing Humiliation,” 11.
175.
Mutimer, The Weapons State, 40.
176.
For an understanding of the concept of abstraction and its deployment in international relations, seeSankaran Krishna, “Race, Amnesia, and the Education of International Relations,” in Decolonizing International Relations, ed. BranwenGruffydd Jones (Plymouth: UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006), 91–95.
177.
NecatiPolat, International Relations, Meaning and Mimesis (New York: Routledge, 2012), 36.
178.
Polat, International Relations, 36.
179.
Polat, International Relations, 36.
180.
Biswas,Nuclear Desire, 70.
181.
Biswas,Nuclear Desire, 179.
182.
Gregoire Mallard, Fallout: Nuclear Diplomacy in an Age of Global Fracture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014), 246.
183.
Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, 67, 55; Mutimer, “Reimagining Security,”1; David Mutimer, The Weapons State, 4.
184.
Mutimer, “Reimagining Security,” 22.
185.
Mutimer, The Weapons State, 8, 97.
186.
Michael Klare, Rogue States and Nuclear Outlaws: America’s Search for a New Foreign Policy(New York: Hill and Wang, 1995), p.14; Mutimer, The Weapons State, 95.
187.
Price, Chemical Weapons Taboo, 144.
188.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 104.
189.
Jackson, Civilizing the Enemy, 57.
190.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 81.
191.
Gusterson, “Nuclear weapons and the Other in the Western Imagination,” 111–112.
192.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 104.
193.
Abraham, “The Ambivalence of Nuclear Histories,” 58.
194.
I borrow the term ‘decorative savages’ from James G. Ferguson, “Of Mimicry and Membership: Africans and the ‘New World Society,’”Cultural Anthropology 17, no. 4(2002): 557.
195.
Ferguson, “Of Mimicry and Membership,” 557.
196.
Said, Orientalism,107–108.
197.
Said, Orientalism,107–108.
198.
Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 62.
199.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 34.
200.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 34.
201.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 32.
202.
Keith Krause, “Cross-cultural dimensions of multilateral non-proliferation and arms control dialogues: An overview,”Contemporary Security Policy 19, no. 1(1998): 14.
203.
Yosef Lapid and FrederichKratochwill, eds, The return of culture and identity in IR theory (Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 1996); Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,”55–82; Latham, “Constructing national security,” 130–131.
204.
Krause, “Cross-cultural dimensions,” 14.
205.
Latham, “Constructing national security,” 131–132.
206.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 38–41; Krause, “Cross-cultural dimensions,”3.
207.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 63.
208.
Krause, “Security Culture,”220.
209.
Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 64.
210.
Krause, “Conclusions: Security Culture,” 231.
211.
Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 64.
212.
R.B.J. Walker, ed., Culture, ideology and world order(Boulder, Colorado: Westview, 1984), 7–8.
213.
Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 56.
214.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 64.
215.
Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 66, see reference2; S.al-Azm, “Orientalism and Orientalism in reverse,” in Orientalism—a reader, ed. A.L. Macfie(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000).
216.
Itty Abraham, “From Bandung to NAM: Non-alignment and Indian Foreign Policy, 1947–65,”Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 46, no. 2(2008): 198, 200.
217.
Abraham, “From Bandung to NAM,” 200, 202.
218.
Abraham, “From Bandung to NAM,” 200.
219.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,”39.
220.
MortenValbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 68.
221.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 38.
222.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 49.
223.
Latham, “Constructing national security,” 133.
224.
Latham, “Constructing national security,” 147; Itty Abraham, “‘Who’s Next?’”48–56.
225.
Jack L. Snyder, The Soviet Strategic Culture: Implications for Nuclear Options, R-2154-AF (Santa Monica, California: Rand Corporation, 1977), 9; Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 36, 43–44.
226.
Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 63.
227.
Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 72–73.
228.
Krause, “Security Culture,”224.
229.
Krause, “Security Culture,” 235.
230.
Keith Krause, “Cross-cultural dimensions of multilateral non-proliferation and arms control dialogues: An overview,”Contemporary Security Policy 19, no. 1(1998): 4.
231.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 61.
232.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 33, 35.
233.
Latham, “Constructing national security,” 136–137.
234.
Valbjorn, “Before, during and after the cultural turn,” 66.
235.
Johnston, “Thinking about Strategic Culture,” 63; Latham, “Constructing national security,” 131.
236.
Krause, “Cross-Cultural Dimensions,”1.
237.
Krause and Latham, “Constructing Non-Proliferation,” 30.
238.
Krause and Latham, “Constructing Non-Proliferation,” 27–28.
239.
Krause and Latham, “Constructing Non-Proliferation,” 34.
240.
Nina Tannenwald, “Stigmatizing the Bomb: Origins of the Nuclear Taboo,”International Security, 29, no. 4, 2005: 5–49.
241.
Chatterjee, “Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World,” 38–39.
242.
Gopal Guru, “Rejection of Rejection,” in Humiliation—Claims and Context, ed. Gopal Guru (Oxford, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 219.
243.
Taussig, Mimesis and Alterity, 67.
244.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 14.
245.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 15.
246.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 16.
247.
Nandy, The Intimate Enemy, xii.
248.
Hugh Gusterson, “Nuclear Weapons and the Other in the Western Imagination,”Cultural Anthropology 14, no. 1(1999): 113 (italics inserted).
249.
Gusterson, “Nuclear Weapons,” 114 (italics inserted).
250.
Gusterson, “Nuclear Weapons,” 115.
251.
Hugh Gusterson, “Nuclear Weapons,” 115.
252.
Barkawi and Laffey, “The Postcolonial Moment in Security Studies,” 338; Hugh Gusterson, People of the Bomb: Portrait of America’s Nuclear Complex(Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota University Press, 2004), ch.2.
253.
Mustafa Kibaroglu, “Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions from a Historical Perspective and the Attitude of the West,”Middle-Eastern Studies 43, no. 2(2007): 227.
254.
Gusterson, “Nuclear Weapons,” 129.
255.
Stephen McGlinchey, “Lyndon B. Johnson and Arms Credit Sales to Iran, 1964–1968,”The Middle East Journal 67, no. 2(2013): 238.
256.
CiroZoppo, “Nuclear Technology, Weapons, and the Third World,”Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, no. 386 (1969): 120.
257.
Zoppo, “Nuclear Technology,” 119.
258.
Zoppo, “Nuclear Technology,” 120.
259.
Jaswant Singh, “Against Nuclear Apartheid,”Foreign Affairs 44, no. 5(1998): 48.
260.
Shampa Biswas, “‘Nuclear Apartheid’ as Political Position: Race as a Postcolonial Discourse,”Alternatives 26, no. 4(October–December 2001): 486, 485–522.
261.
Biswas,“Nuclear Apartheid,” 485–522.
262.
Quoted in Biswas, “Nuclear Apartheid,” 497, see footnote 37.
263.
Oran R. Young, “Chinese Views on the Spread of Nuclear Weapons,”The China Quarterly, no. 26 (1966): 144.
264.
Young, “Chinese Views,” 149,151.
265.
Young, “Chinese Views,” 146.
266.
Bruce Cumings, “On the Strategy and Morality of American Nuclear Policy in Korea—1950 to the Present,”Social Science Japan Journal 1, no. 1(1998): 59.
267.
Young, “Chinese Views,” 158.
268.
Biswas, “‘Nuclear Apartheid,’” 497, see footnote 39.
269.
K. Subramanyam quoted in article by Richard K. Betts, “Incentives for Nuclear Weapons: India, Pakistan, Iran,”Asian Survey 19, no. 11 (1979): 1068–69.
270.
K.C. Pant, “Rajya Sabha Extensive Debate on India’s Peaceful Nuclear Explosion,” August 21, 1974, Indian Nuclear History collection, Wilson Center Digital Archive, 251–253, retrieved from http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/119760, cited by VipinNarang, “Strategies of Nuclear Proliferation: How States Pursue the Bomb,”International Security 41, no. 3(2016/17): 139, footnote 72.
271.
Sanjay Palshikar, “Understanding Humiliation,” in Humiliation—Claims and Context, ed. Gopal Guru (Oxford, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 82.
272.
Palshikar, “Understanding Humiliation,” 82.
273.
Palshikar, “Understanding Humiliation,” 82.
274.
Ashish Nandy, “Humiliation—Politics and the Cultural psychology of the Limits of Human Degradation,” in Humiliation—Claims and Context,ed. Gopal Guru (Oxford, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 51.
275.
Jaswant Singh, “Against Nuclear Apartheid,”Foreign Affairs 44, no. 5(1998): 43.
276.
Singh, “Against Nuclear Apartheid,” 43–44.
277.
Bertrand Goldschmidt, “A Historical Survey of Nonproliferation Policies,”International Security 2, no. 1(1997): 78.
278.
Singh, “Against Nuclear Apartheid,” 43.
279.
Singh, “Against Nuclear Apartheid,” 44–45.
280.
Quote cited in Shampa Biswas, “‘Nuclear Apartheid’ as Political Position: Race as a Postcolonial Discourse,”Alternatives 26, no. 4(October–December 2001): 497, see footnote 44.
281.
Singh, “Against Nuclear Apartheid,” 50–52.
282.
Singh, “Against Nuclear Apartheid,” 52.
283.
Quoted cited in Biswas, “‘Nuclear Apartheid,’” 496, see footnote 43.
284.
Mutimer, “Reimagining Security,” 36.
285.
DavidMutimer, “Reimagining Security,” 36.
286.
DavidMutimer, “Reimagining Security,” 36.
287.
Charles Krauthammer, “The Unipolar Moment,”Foreign Affairs 70, no. 1(1991): 32–33.
288.
Joseph S. Nye Jr., “NPT: The Logic of Inequality,”Foreign Policy, no. 59 (1985): 123.
289.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 123.
290.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 123.
291.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality” 124.
292.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 124, 129.
293.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 124–126.
294.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 126.
295.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 126.
296.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 126.
297.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 127.
298.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 128.
299.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 127.
300.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 131.
301.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality,” 130.
302.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality” 128.
303.
Nye, “The Logic of Inequality” 130.
304.
Richard K. Betts, “Incentives for Nuclear Weapons: India, Pakistan, Iran,”Asian Survey 19, no. 11 (1979): 1053.
305.
Betts, “Incentives for Nuclear Weapons,” 1054.
306.
Betts, “Incentives for Nuclear Weapons,” 1061–1062(emphasis by Betts).
307.
Gregoire Mallard, Fallout: Nuclear Diplomacy in an Age of Global Fracture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014), 246.
308.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 7–8.
309.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 7.
310.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 220.
311.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 224.
312.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 220–221.
313.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy 231–232.
314.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 221.
315.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 14.
316.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 14.
317.
Mallard quoting Astrid Forland in Nuclear Diplomacy, 8.
318.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy,15(italics inserted).
319.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 225, 228.
320.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 228.
321.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 15.
322.
Mallard, Nuclear Diplomacy, 15.
323.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 138–139.
324.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 138.
325.
Abraham, Indian Atomic Bomb, 138.
326.
Victor Villanueva, “On the Rhetoric and Precedents of Racism,”College Composition and Communication 50, no. 4(1999), p. 653.
327.
Mustafa Kibaroglu, “Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions from a Historical Perspective and the Attitude of the West,”Middle-Eastern Studies 43, no. 2(2007): 231.
328.
Kibaroglu, “Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions,” 232.
329.
Kibaroglu, “Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions,” 232–233.
330.
Kibaroglu, “Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions.”
331.
Mutimer, The Weapons State, 141.
332.
Harald Muller cited by Kibaroglu, “Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions,” 233, see footnote 90; Harald Muller, “Non-Proliferation Policy in Western Europe: Structural Aspects,” in A European Non-Proliferation Policy, 1988–1992, Muller (European Interuniversity Press, 1993), 86.
333.
Kibaroglu, “Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions,” 231.
334.
Kibaroglu, “Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions,” 231.
335.
Mutimer, The Weapons State, 141, 156–157.
336.
Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison (New York: Pantheon Books, 1977). Foucault engages with the question of power by making a subtle distinction between sovereign power (publicly exhibited) and disciplinary power (everyday practices of normalization).
337.
Abraham, “The Ambivalence of Nuclear Histories,” 55.
338.
NeeraChandhoke, “Equality for What? Or the Troublesome Relation between Egalitarianism and Respect,” in Humiliation—Claims and Context, ed. Gopal Guru (Oxford, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 146.
339.
NeeraChandhoke, “Equality for What?”150.
340.
Chandhoke, “Equality for What?,” 151.
341.
Chandhoke, “Equality for What?,” 153.
342.
Chandhoke, “Equality for What?,” 153.
343.
Chandhoke, “Equality for What?,” 155.
344.
Chandhoke, “Equality for What?,” 157.
345.
Ashish Nandy, “Humiliation—Politics and the Cultural Psychology of the Limits of Human Degradation,” in Humiliation—Claims and Context,ed. Gopal Guru (Oxford, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 45.
346.
Nandy, “Humiliation—Politics,” 45.
347.
Amanda Moodie and Michael Moodie, “Alternative Narratives for Arms Control,”The Nonproliferation Review 17, no. 2(2010): 315, 318.
348.
Moodie and Moodie, “Alternative Narratives,” 315.
349.
Margarita H. Petrova, “Rhetorical Entrapment and Normative Enticement: How the United Kingdom Turned from Spoiler into Champion of the Cluster Munition Ban,”International Studies Quarterly 60, no. 3(2016): 394.
350.
Moodie and Moodie, “Alternative Narratives for Arms Control,” 315.
351.
Katzenstein, Civilizations in World Politics, 11.
352.
Katzenstein, Civilizations in World Politics, 11.
353.
Katzenstein, Civilizations in World Politics, 13.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Political Science & Geography, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
Ritu Mathur

Authors

Ritu Mathur
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mathur, R. (2020). Sly Civility and Institutionalized Humiliation. In: Civilizational Discourses in Weapons Control. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44943-8_4

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44943-8_4
Published: 12 July 2020
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-44942-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-44943-8
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics