Fear, Identity, and Instrumentalised Narratives in Contemporary Geopolitical Discourse: From Clausewitz to Cognitive Governance

This paper situates contemporary geopolitical discourse within the political economy of uncertainty. It examines how fear, identity mobilisation, and narrative simplification function not merely as distortions of rational policy-making, but as instrumental resources through which institutions legitimate authority, mobilise resources, and coordinate behaviour under conditions of perceived systemic transition. Drawing on political psychology, international relations theory, and strategic studies, the analysis proceeds in three steps. First, it identifies recurrent cognitive and social patterns that tend to become salient under uncertainty, including worst-case reasoning, in-group consolidation, narrative dominance, and ambiguity reduction. Second, it examines how these patterns may be amplified to serve specific institutional objectives, such as emergency legitimation, deterrence signalling, and the normalisation of structural change. A contemporary illustration drawn from transatlantic tensions over Greenland is used to clarify how cross-domain linkage between security and economic instruments can accelerate these dynamics within alliance systems. Finally, the paper advances a theoretical synthesis spanning classical and contemporary war theory. It proposes that while the political nature of war identified by Carl von Clausewitz remains analytically relevant, its dominant mode of operation has increasingly shifted toward what is termed cognitive governance: the management of fear, expectations, and legitimacy at the population level. The paper concludes by outlining analytically derived, policy-relevant conditions under which institutions may preserve strategic realism while reintroducing reversibility into fear-based governance, thereby mitigating long-run risks of institutional erosion and permanent emergency politics. The paper does not provide empirical testing, causal estimation, or predictive claims; its contribution is analytical and conceptual.