ABSTRACT
The starting point for this chapter is a rejection of the traditional idea that foreign policy builds bridges between preexisting entities called states. Instead I argue that as it is practiced, and by virtue of the fact that it deals with difference, foreign policy constructs national political identity. Foreign policy is then an identity-making tool that erects boundaries between the self and the other, defining in the process what are national interests. This is an idea developed in the poststructuralist/postmodern literature and I draw on R.B.J. Walker, William Connolly, Michael Shapiro, and David Campbell, and their works on ideas, identity, and otherness. However, I diverge from this literature when I define the construction of the other as emanating not only from negative differences and from antagonism, but also from positive approximation. All others can be divided into two different groups: allies and enemies. National political identity is produced or reproduced following its contact with allies and enemies. By dealing with enemies, identity is reinforced through the specification of what “identity” is not, presenting these differences as a threat to what the self is believed to be. However, I argue that there is also the other side of identity, the making of which is not to be overlooked. By dealing with allies, one’s identity is reinforced by affirming the links and characteristics that make that specific other an ally. This is a positive identification of what constitutes the self. Thus, I argue, constructing identity through antagonisms is not a sufficient explanation, although it does provide a solid beginning to the explanation of foreign policy, national identity, and interest building.
