| The increasing reliance of the American military on weaponized drones in counter terrorism efforts has produced a contentious debate regarding the use of drones. This debate is characterized by two competing social discourses. First, a dominant discourse, articulated by the political elite in the United States, that advocates the use of drones as an issue of national security, while maintaining the clandestine nature of the drone program. Second, a subversive discourse, primarily articulated by legal scholars and human rights organizations, that criticize the civilian casualties resulting from the United States' use of drones and attempts to expose the human experience of drone strikes by exposing the clandestine. This project utilizes interpretative content analysis to establish the major themes present in the dominant discourse by evaluating seminal policy speeches given by members of the Obama Administration regarding drone warfare. To establish the primary themes of the subversive discourse, this project uses a multi-methodological approach, employing interpretative content analysis of two Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) reports and visual analysis of the post-drone strike photography of Pakistani journalist, Noor Behram. These discourses are organized by three frames (Security, Insecurity, and Story) that attempt to garner or maintain public support and generate or suppress collective action. Examination of these frames reveals that the subversive discourse has been unable to prompt a sustained policy-changing movement within the United States but has prompted the release of documents by the Obama Administration that incompletely account for drone strike and their guiding policies. |
