Reply to Christine Sylvester, “Terro rWars: Boston Iraq”: An examination of differences between counter-terrorism and war as seen through the Iraqi experience of occupation

This response examines what is overlooked in Sylvester’s analysis of similarities between the US police security response to the Boston marathon bombings (2013) and Kevin Powers’ fictionalized account of the US war operations in Al Tafar, Iraq (2004) and evaluates the consequences for our understanding of contemporary war. This is done by highlighting differences between the experience of residents in Boston and the (real) town of Tal Afar, key among them the insecurity, fear and calamity that result from the distinct political realities in these locations. The experience of war from the perspective of the victims adds an important dimension to the debate over the changing nature of war. At a time that is marked by an unprecedented level of technologization and visual mediation, it brings into focus the fragmentary and often one-sided evidence on which our knowledge of contemporary war is based. It reminds us to ask not only what we know about war, but how we know it.

The EU Counter-Terrorism Policy Responses to the Attacks in Paris: Towards an EU Security and Liberty Agenda. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 81/February 2015

This paper examines the main EU-level initiatives that have been put forward in the weeks following the attacks in Paris in January 2015, which will be discussed in the informal European Council meeting of 12 February 2015. It argues that a majority of these proposals predated the Paris shootings and had until that point proved contentious as regards their efficacy, legitimacy and lawfulness. The paper finds that EU counterterrorism responses raise two fundamental challenges: A first challenge is posed to the freedom of movement, Schengen and EU citizenship. Priority is being given to the expanded use of large-scale surveillance and systematic monitoring of all travellers including EU citizens, which stands in contravention of Schengen and the free movement principle. A second challenge concerns EU democratic rule of law. Current pressures calling for the adoption of measures such as the EU Passenger Name Record challenge the scrutiny roles held by the European Parliament and the Court of Justice of the EU on counterterrorism measures in a post-Lisbon Treaty setting. The paper proposes that the EU adopts a new European Agenda on Security and Liberty based on an EU security (criminal justice-led) cooperation model that is firmly anchored in current EU legal principles and rule of law standards. This model would call for ‘less is more’ concerning the use, processing and retention of data by police and intelligence communities. Instead, it would pursue better and more accurate use of data meeting the quality standards of evidence in criminal judicial proceedings.

The EU and its Counter-Terrorism Policies after the Paris Attacks. Liberty and Security in Europe No. 84, 27 November 2015

This paper examines the EU’s counter-terrorism policies responding to the Paris attacks of 13 November 2015. It argues that these events call for a re-think of the current information-sharing and preventive-justice model guiding the EU’s counter-terrorism tools, along with security agencies such as Europol and Eurojust. Priority should be given to independently evaluating ‘what has worked’ and ‘what has not’ when it comes to police and criminal justice cooperation in the Union. Current EU counter-terrorism policies face two challenges: one is related to their efficiency and other concerns their legality. ‘More data’ without the necessary human resources, more effective cross-border operational cooperation and more trust between the law enforcement authorities of EU member states is not an efficient policy response. Large-scale surveillance and preventive justice techniques are also incompatible with the legal and judicial standards developed by the Court of Justice of the EU. The EU can bring further added value first, by boosting traditional policing and criminal justice cooperation to fight terrorism; second, by re-directing EU agencies’ competences towards more coordination and support in cross-border operational cooperation and joint investigations, subject to greater accountability checks (Europol and Eurojust +); and third, by improving the use of policy measures following a criminal justice-led cooperation model focused on improving cross-border joint investigations and the use of information that meets the quality standards of ‘evidence’ in criminal judicial proceedings. Any EU and national counter-terrorism policies must not undermine democratic rule of law, fundamental rights or the EU’s founding constitutional principles, such as the free movement of persons and the Schengen system. Otherwise, these policies will defeat their purpose by generating more insecurity, instability, mistrust and legal uncertainty for all.

Meta-level terrorism futures : constructing and deconstructing using causal layered analysis

Focused on the alternative futures of terrorism, this study engages with the different levels of terrorism knowledge to identify and challenge the restrictive narratives that define terrorism: that "society must be defended" from the "constant and evolving terrorist threat". Using Causal Layered Analysis to deconstruct and reconstruct strategies, alternative scenarios emerge. These alternative futures are depicted collectively as a maze, highlighting the prospect of navigating towards preferred and even shared terrorism futures, once these are supported by new and inclusive metaphors and stakeholder engagement.

Constructing Enemies: 'Islamic Terrorism' in Political and Academic Discourse

Jackson, Richard, (2007) 'Constructing Enemies: 'Islamic Terrorism' in Political and Academic Discourse', Government and Opposition, 42(3) pp.394-426 RAE2008

Terrorism Laws and Legal Accountability

This chapter explores the extent to which courts can contribute to the countering of terrorism. It suggests that the contribution will depend on the type of actor the courts are attempting to hold to account as well as on the powers that are conferred on courts by national and international legal regimes. It concludes that courts are most legitimate and effective in relation to terrorist suspects and law enforcers, but less so in relation to counter-terrorism operatives and law-makers.

The Extra-territorial Obligations of European States regarding Human Rights in the Context of Terrorism

This chapter focuses on the growing tendency of international human rights law to require states to protect the rights of non-nationals who are in the state unlawfully and of nationals and non-nationals who are outside the state, especially when any of these people are involved in terrorist or counter-terrorist activity. It reviews these additional obligations within a European context, focusing on EU law and the law of the European Convention on Human Rights and drawing on the case law of UK courts. Part 1 considers when a European state must grant asylum to alleged terrorists on the basis that otherwise they would suffer human rights abuses in the state from which they are fleeing. Part 2 examines whether, outside of asylum claims, a European state must not deport or extradite an alleged terrorist because he or she might suffer an abuse of human rights in the receiving state. Part 3 looks at whether a European state whose security forces are engaged in counter-terrorism activities abroad is obliged to protect the human rights of the individuals serving in those forces and/or the human rights of the alleged terrorists they are confronting. While welcoming the extension of state responsibility, the chapter notes that it is occurring in a way which introduces three aspects of relativity into the protection of human rights. First, European law protects only some human rights extra-territorially. Second, it protects those rights only when there is ‘a real risk’ of their being violated. Third, sometimes it protects those rights only when there is a real risk of their being violated ‘flagrantly’.

The Golden Age? What the 100 Most Cited Articles in Terrorism Studies Tell Us

ln a context where widespread failings in the nature of terrorism research are well recognised - yet where the quantity of work is still enormous - is it possible to fairly assess whether the field is progressing or if it has become mired in mediocre research? Citation analysis is widely used to reveal the evolution and extent of progress in fields of study and to provide valuable insight into major trends and achievements. This study identifies and analyses the current 100 most cited journal articles in terrorism studies. A search was performed using Google Scholar for peer reviewed journal articles on subjects related to terrorism and counter-terrorism. The most cited papers were published across 62 journals which reflected the interdisciplinary nature of terrorism studies. Compared to other articles, the most cited papers were more likely to be the result of colloborative research and were also more likely to provide new data. 63 of the top 1-00 articles have been published since 2001. The findings are discussed in relation to the evolution of terrorism research and current debates on progress in the field.

Policing, Terrorism and the Conundrum of 'Community': A Northern Ireland Perspective

The book chapter examines the conundrums and contradictions for PSNI in delivering their community policing agenda within a post-conflict environment which simultaneously demands the delivery of counter-terrorism policing in view of the current dissident terrorist threat.

Teaching and Learning in Maritime Security: A Literature Review

With the rise in attacks and attempted attacks on marine‐based critical infrastructure, maritime security is an issue of increasing importance worldwide. However, there are three significant shortfalls in the efforts to overcome potential threats to maritime security: the need for greater understanding of whether current standards of best practice are truly successful in combating and reducing the risks of terrorism and other security issues, the absence of a collective maritime security best practice framework and the need for improved access to maritime security specific graduate and postgraduate (long) courses. This paper presents an overview of existing international, regional national standards of best practice and shows that literature concerning the measurement and/ or success of standards is virtually non‐existent. In addition, despite the importance of maritime workers to ensuring the safety of marine based critical infrastructure, a similar review of available Australian education courses shows a considerable lack of availability of maritime security‐specific courses other than short courses that cover only basic security matters. We argue that the absence of an Australian best practice framework informed by evaluation of current policy responses – particularly in the post 9/11 environment – leaves Australia vulnerable to maritime security threats. As this paper shows, the reality is that despite the security measures put in place post 9/11, there is still considerable work to be done to ensure Australia is equipped to overcome the threats posed to maritime security.

Laying the Groundwork for the Successful Deployment of Communication Interception Technology (CIT) in Modern Policing

With the growth and development of communication technology there is an increasing need for the use of interception technologies in modern policing. Law enforcement agencies are faced with increasingly sophisticated and complex criminal networks that utilise modern communication technology as a basis for their criminal success. In particular, transnational organised crime (TOC) is a diverse and complicated arena, costing global society in excess of $3 trillion annually, a figure that continues to grow (Borger, 2007) as crime groups take advantage of disappearing borders and greater profit markets. However, whilst communication can be a critical success factor for criminal enterprise it is also a key vulnerability. It is this vulnerability that the use of CIT, such as phone taps or email interception, can exploit. As such, law enforcement agencies now need a method and framework that allows them to utilise CIT to combat these crimes efficiently and successfully. This paper provides a review of current literature with the specific purpose of considering the effectiveness of CIT in the fight against TOC and the groundwork that must be laid in order for it to be fully exploited. In doing so, it fills an important gap in current research, focusing on the practical implementation of CIT as opposed to the traditional area of privacy concerns that arise with intrusive methods of investigation. The findings support the notion that CIT is an essential intelligence gathering tool that has a strong place within the modern policing arena. It identifies that the most effective use of CIT is grounded within a proactive, intelligence‐led framework and concludes that in order for this to happen Australian authorities and law enforcement agencies must re‐evaluate and address the current legislative and operational constraints placed on the use of CIT and the culture that surrounds intelligence in policing.