Journal article 278 views 62 downloads
Death by Reinterpretation: Dynamics of Norm Contestation and the US Ban on Assassination in the Reagan Years
Journal of Global Security Studies, Volume: 6, Issue: 4
Swansea University Author: Luca Trenta
PDF | Version of Record
© The Author(s) (2021). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution LicenseDownload (357.01KB)
Recent scholarship analyzes norm dynamics in the US context using the prohibition on assassination contained in Executive Order 12333 as the relevant norm. These studies argue that—before 9/11—the ban on assassination was largely uncontested and effectively constrained US foreign policy. In do- ing...
|Published in:||Journal of Global Security Studies|
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Check full text
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Recent scholarship analyzes norm dynamics in the US context using the prohibition on assassination contained in Executive Order 12333 as the relevant norm. These studies argue that—before 9/11—the ban on assassination was largely uncontested and effectively constrained US foreign policy. In do- ing so, these studies overlook the impact of the Reagan administration on the evolution of the ban. This article establishes that the Reagan administration engaged in a concerted, and largely successful, effort to undermine the ban. The article relies on scholarship on norm contestation and norm robust- ness. The analysis identifies key features of the ban as a norm, including its ambiguity and executive character. It highlights the role and power of a cluster of US officials led by Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director William Casey. Crucially, the analysis traces the prominence of dynamics of contesta- tion of the ban in the context of unconventional warfare and counterterrorism. In line with existing scholarship, the analysis finds cases of validity contestation, meaning contestation, and applicatory contestation. Contrary to existing scholarship, however, the analysis stresses the radical nature of ac- tors’ attempts to shrink the remit of the ban through applicatory contestation. This contestation was often made superfluous by the blurring—through meaning contestation—of the expectations set by the norm. A historically grounded analysis of contestation during the Reagan years provides a better understanding of how US officials (re)shaped the ban, establishing precedents for the legal, political, and discursive conventions surrounding assassination deployed after 9/11.
assassination, Reagan administration, norm robustness, norm contestation, CIA
College of Arts and Humanities