“Poscolonial Moment” in Foreign Policy Discourse: the Casus of “Global Britain”

K. Godovanyuk
{"title":"“Poscolonial Moment” in Foreign Policy Discourse: the Casus of “Global Britain”","authors":"K. Godovanyuk","doi":"10.46272/2587-8476-2023-14-2-116-132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article explores interrelation between the postcolonial discourse and modern British foreign policy, designated as a “postcolonial moment” in the strategic thinking of the political establishment. It is noted that the withdrawal from the EU has again attracted public and academic attention to the imperial past, which is sometimes regarded not only as a possible reason for Brexit, but also as a starting point for design of the country’s foreign policy under the new conditions (the idea of “Global Britain”). The post-imperial discourse in the modern British political environment is analyzed within several aspects: how it affects the strategic reasoning of the elite circles, specific trends in dealing with the former colonies, and postcolonialism components in the new foreign strategy (case of “Indo-Pacific tilt”). Proceeding from the paradigm of postcolonial constructivism, the article shows that the issues of imperial heritage still remain an important aspect in British foreign policy identity, but in the context of strategic planning it takes on new meanings. Firstly, the political establishment continues to search for a new international role and appeals to the former colonies as a resource of their foreign policy (whether it is economy, strategy, or image). Secondly, distancing themselves from the rhetoric of the colonial past, they refer to “common history” and identity as the world politics see the formation of a polycentric system. This trend is reflected in the challenge of building new long-term alliances through “patient diplomacy.” The “Global Britain” discourse, due to its direct connotation with the postcolonial past, becomes undesirable for both the ruling political elite and the opposition.","PeriodicalId":42590,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Business Analytics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Business Analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46272/2587-8476-2023-14-2-116-132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article explores interrelation between the postcolonial discourse and modern British foreign policy, designated as a “postcolonial moment” in the strategic thinking of the political establishment. It is noted that the withdrawal from the EU has again attracted public and academic attention to the imperial past, which is sometimes regarded not only as a possible reason for Brexit, but also as a starting point for design of the country’s foreign policy under the new conditions (the idea of “Global Britain”). The post-imperial discourse in the modern British political environment is analyzed within several aspects: how it affects the strategic reasoning of the elite circles, specific trends in dealing with the former colonies, and postcolonialism components in the new foreign strategy (case of “Indo-Pacific tilt”). Proceeding from the paradigm of postcolonial constructivism, the article shows that the issues of imperial heritage still remain an important aspect in British foreign policy identity, but in the context of strategic planning it takes on new meanings. Firstly, the political establishment continues to search for a new international role and appeals to the former colonies as a resource of their foreign policy (whether it is economy, strategy, or image). Secondly, distancing themselves from the rhetoric of the colonial past, they refer to “common history” and identity as the world politics see the formation of a polycentric system. This trend is reflected in the challenge of building new long-term alliances through “patient diplomacy.” The “Global Britain” discourse, due to its direct connotation with the postcolonial past, becomes undesirable for both the ruling political elite and the opposition.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外交政策话语中的“后殖民时刻”:“全球化英国”的成因
本文探讨了后殖民话语与现代英国外交政策之间的相互关系,在政治机构的战略思维中,这被称为“后殖民时刻”。值得注意的是,脱欧再次引起了公众和学术界对帝国历史的关注,这有时不仅被视为英国脱欧的可能原因,而且被视为在新条件下设计国家外交政策的起点(“全球英国”的想法)。本文从几个方面分析了现代英国政治环境中的后帝国主义话语:它如何影响精英圈的战略推理,处理前殖民地的具体趋势,以及新外交战略中的后殖民主义成分(以“印太倾斜”为例)。本文从后殖民建构主义范式出发,表明帝国遗产问题仍然是英国外交政策认同的一个重要方面,但在战略规划的背景下,它具有新的意义。首先,政治机构继续寻求新的国际角色,并呼吁前殖民地作为其外交政策(无论是经济、战略还是形象)的资源。其次,在世界政治看到多中心体系的形成时,他们将自己与殖民历史的修辞划清界限,提到“共同历史”和身份。这一趋势反映在通过“耐心外交”建立新的长期联盟的挑战上。“全球化的英国”话语,由于其与后殖民历史的直接内涵,变得不受执政的政治精英和反对派的欢迎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
27.30%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The main objective of the International Journal of Business Analytics (IJBAN) is to advance the next frontier of decision sciences and provide an international forum for practitioners and researchers in business and governmental organizations—as well as information technology professionals, software developers, and vendors—to exchange, share, and present useful and innovative ideas and work. The journal encourages exploration of different models, methods, processes, and principles in profitable and actionable manners.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the Impact of Work-Life Balance on Job Satisfaction for Saudi Private Sector C-Level Employees Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Method for FinTech Credit Scoring and Risk Management AI Ethics Malaysia’s Neocolonial Struggle: Unraveling the Complexities of Postcolonial Dynamics Narratives in School History Textbooks: An East African Perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1