Cadence, war and security

An increased incidence of attack has been identified as a major characteristic of the new threat posed by terrorist groups such as al Qaeda. This article considers what such a change means for Western national security systems by examining bow different parts of the system change over time. It becomes evident that Western national security systems are structured on an assumption of comparatively slow state-based threats. In contrast, terrorist franchises operate at a faster pace, are more 'lightweight' and can adapt within the operational and capability cycles of Western governments. Neither network-centric warfare nor an improved assessment of the threat, called for by some, offers a panacea in this regard. Rather, it is clear that not only do Western governments need to adjust their operational and capability cycles, but that they also need a greater diversity of responses to increase overall national security resilience and offer more tools for policy-makers.

Knowledge, economy, technology and society: The politics of discourse

The WSIS is centrally interested in knowledge and has defined for itself a mission that is broadly humanitarian. Its development ‘talk’ is, rightly, replete with notions of equity, preserving culture, justice, human rights and so on. In incorporating such issues into knowledge society and economy discussions, WSIS has adopted a different posture towards knowledge than is seen in dominant discourses. This study analyses the dominant knowledge discourse using a large corpus of knowledge-related policy documents, discourse theory and an interrelational understanding of knowledge. I show that it is important to understand this dominant knowledge discourse because of its capacity to limit thought and action in relation to its central topic, knowledge. The results of this study demonstrate that the dominant knowledge discourse is technocratic, frequently insensitive to the humane mission at the core of the WSIS, and is based on a partial understanding of what knowledge is and how knowledge systems work. Moreover, I show that knowledge is inherently political, that the dominant knowledge discourse is politically oriented towards the concerns of business and technology, but that an emancipatory politics of knowledge is possible.