IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v13y2025a9424.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Security and Liberty in Post‐9/11 US Counterterrorism: A Comparative Analysis of Presidential Rhetoric

Author

Listed:
  • Teodora Tea Ristevska

    (Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Iztok Prezelj

    (Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia)

Abstract

The article examines the rhetorical dimensions of US counterterrorism policy post‐9/11 through a comparative analysis of four key speeches by Presidents Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden. Using Van Gorp’s (2007) hermeneutic framing analysis, the study explores how each administration balanced (or did not) the demands of national security and civil liberties across different political and historical contexts. The findings show these US presidents employed framing devices like metaphors, examples, catchphrases, and depictions to construct a narrative of existential threat, fear, and urgency, securing public support for expansive government action. While Bush and Trump framed terrorism as an existential threat to justify aggressive measures, Obama and Biden adopted more moderate rhetoric, balancing security with civil liberties. The study identifies enduring patterns in the way framing devices are adapted across administrations and reveals how metaphors continue to be effective despite changing rhetorical strategies. These findings demonstrate the bidirectional role of framing devices: They can either drive securitisation, as evident in the rhetoric of Bush and Trump, or promote desecuritisation and a more balanced approach, as seen with Obama and Biden.

Suggested Citation

  • Teodora Tea Ristevska & Iztok Prezelj, 2025. "Security and Liberty in Post‐9/11 US Counterterrorism: A Comparative Analysis of Presidential Rhetoric," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 13.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v13:y:2025:a:9424
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.9424
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/9424
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.9424?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v13:y:2025:a:9424. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.