Periodic Reporting for period 1 - RITUAL DETERRENCE (Ritual Action: Making Deterrence Matter in International Security and Memory Politics)
Reporting period: 2022-09-01 to 2025-02-28
The goal of the project is to foster the understanding of ritual action in international politics through the case of deterrence. The RITUAL DETERRENCE project investigates deterrence through the lens of ritual theory, to understand its political and psychological effects in international relations. It explores the role of ritual action in making deterrence effective, affectively charged and credible in the eyes of its practitioners. Empirically, the project pursues systematic cross-cultural and cross-domain research on deterrence as a multi-modal social practice. The research will be based on a set of in-depth qualitative case studies investigating historical and contemporary contexts: nuclear deterrence in NATO-Warsaw Pact relations during the Cold War, NATO-Russia deterrence dynamics in the post-Cold War era; Russian deterrence in the maritime realm and the grey zone; USA-China deterrence relationship in the post-Cold War era, and memory-political deterrence in Eastern Europe. In delivering a new description of the practice of deterrence and an overhaul of the theory of deterrence, the project seeks to offer a comprehensive rethinking of the performance, credibility and the presumed effect of deterrence. Tracing and historicising the interaction ritual chains of deterrence will generate crucial knowledge about how deterrence performances enact and legitimise political communities. The RITUAL DETERRENCE project aims to provide a systematic, sociological and comparative research on deterrence as a social practice across different dimensions (military, political-diplomatic, legislative) and types of deterrence (conventional, nuclear, cyber, hybrid, legal) on crucial contemporary (NATO-Russia, US-Russia, US-China; memory laws in Eastern Europe) and historical cases (NATO-Warsaw Pact). The study combines discourse and practice analysis with expert interviews, participant observation of military exercises and wargaming, encompassing both direct and extended deterrence along traditional and emerging domains of deterrence. Data will be collected through in-depth interviews with experts and practitioners (diplomats, military, and policy-makers). There will be (participant) observation of summits and bilateral meetings, large-scale military exercises, public ceremonies, force posture shifts, military training and war simulations, and content analysis of contextual data. In addition, there will be discourse analysis of pertinent documentation, debates and archival evidence.
Since the beginning of the RITUAL DETERRENCE project in September 2022, the research group has focused on realising its three objectives: (1) to develop a new theoretical approach for understanding how credible threats and commitment are accomplished in international security and memory politics; (2) to conduct in-depth qualitative case studies to trace and investigate interaction chains in a set of crucial contemporary and historical deterrence relationships and contexts, exploring variation in mutual assessments of credibility performance; (3) to advance a broader understanding of ritual action in international security politics by providing a methodical description and analysis of how political identities and communities are constituted through practices of deterrence. Our novel analytical framework focuses on the actors and their distinct roles in the interaction chains of deterrence, the situational setting of a deterrence act, the political context of threat formulation, the symbolic expressions of reciprocity, the related rules and the history of pertinent interactions, and elucidating the ritual features and functions of the said interaction chains. We have made most progress with case studies on NATO-Russia contemporary deterrence interactions, with a focus on NATO’s Enhanced Forward Presence in the Alliance’s eastern flank, and memory-political deterrence. Building on the in-depth interviews with allied policy officials, diplomats and military practitioners, the preliminary research results illuminate the symbolism attached to the American force presence and hosting of nuclear status states (as in case of the Baltic states) and the expressed readiness to host nuclear weapons on their territory (as in case of Poland). The ritualised mobilisation of such assets sheds light on the political and psychological dynamics of deterrence-making. We have published these findings in 3 journal articles and 2 op-eds, in addition to dissemination via various academic and policy conferences, 14 invited talks, webinars, podcasts, blogs and media engagement across radio, television and print media.
The already published work and the work in progress by the research team develop a comprehensive and original theoretical framework for examining the ritual qualities and symbolic action central to deterrence as a social practice. Our approach allows for a synthesized study of the symbolic and strategic logics of action in the practice of deterrence, defying the long-contested rational/non-rational behaviour divide in International Relations theory. We offer a considerably improved framework for grasping the performance, credibility and the presumed effect of deterrence as a central practice in international relations, particularly in international security and memory politics. Our work is demonstrating not only the added value theorising deterrence through a ritual perspective offers for empirical investigations, but also how ritual action can problematise mainstream accounts of the logics of action in international relations at large. The RITUAL DETERRENCE project has launched novel concepts (such as memory-political deterrence; deterrence icons) and provided thickly substantiated case studies of the fast evolving extended conventional deterrence posture on the example of NATO’s eastern flank, drawing on extensive interview research and participant observation of pertinent policy seminars and military exercises. Empirically, we have brought into focus the traditionally understudied ‘deterrence-takers’ (rather than ‘deterrence-makers’) in international politics, zooming in on the voices from the protégée states, fighting for their status in the North Atlantic alliance, thus expanding the traditional disciplinary gaze on dominant deterrence pairs. The project has further demonstrated the ways in which memory-political deterrence is intertwined with geopolitics on the example of Russia and China.