Implications for human security, civil society, and charities
Kawser Ahmed and Scott N. Romaniuk
Canadians usually subscribe to the notion that the federal conservative party is more pro-security than its liberal opponents and hence its robust posture in introducing the crime bill (C10), anti-terrorism bill (C51), and tough citizenship and immigration laws, which might have cost it its re-election bid in the past. Once the Liberal government took office in 2015, its election manifesto outlined a promise to change the “controversial” clauses of bill C51; however, as of today, no concrete measures have been delivered toward fulfilling the promise. Additionally, some global and local events are taking place at a rapid pace such as a refugee influx from the South, Canada’s withdrawal from global conflict zones versus its renewed interests in peacekeeping operations, home-grown lone-wolf terrorism, violent right-wing extremism, environmental and indigenous activism. These have significant national security implications and whether Canada is ready to face these challenges through its current security governance mechanism needs to be explored earnestly. In light of these challenges this chapter aims to contextualize the existing security governance structure (primarily related to the federal public safety, immigration, national defence, and justice departments) along with relevant legislation in dealing with the unfolding events. Next, it explains essential ramifications for Canadians in general, and civil society in particular, as the security governance regime affects them on a daily basis. A qualitative methodological approach is adopted to research the subject and the primary source of data is one-on-one interviews from principal actors in all the above-mentioned government as well as civil society sectors.
The Philippines is lauded as having one of the most dense and robust civil societies in the world. Born out of the anti-dictatorship struggle, it earned the reputation as a fierce defender of human rights and democracy. This chapter discusses the impact of 9/11 and the scourge of terrorism in Southeast Asia as regards the Philippine homeland from 2001 onward. It particularly examines the policies and reform programs implemented by the Macapagal-Arroyo (2001–2010) and Aquino (2010–2016) presidencies. This chapter argues that the Philippine participation in the “Global War on Terror” (GWOT) and revitalized cooperation with the United States against regional terrorism has caused an erosion in democracy and civil liberties such as the declaration of emergency rule, extra-judicial killings, and a crackdown on dissent and protest mobilizations. And while this was justified to defend the homeland, it also was used to safeguard the survival of sitting governments against oppositional elites and their partners in civil society. The case of the Philippines demonstrates that while governments can justify enhanced powers and regimes of exception for homeland security, these policies are often enforced with the overriding goals of domestic political survival and legitimacy regeneration. It concludes by offering preliminary discussion and analysis about how the Duterte administration employs and enhances existing anti-terrorism and security policy frameworks to deal with the country’s complex security challenges.
Brazil’s ambiguous entrance into the Global War on Terror
Camila de Macedo Braga and Ana Maura Tomesani
This chapter analyzes the ways in which regional security governance and Brazilian security policies were influenced and transformed in the context of the US-led agenda for the “Global War on Terror” (GWOT). In Brazil and beyond, security governance apparatus reflects the ambivalent logics of the authoritarian focus on internal security and the democratic civil-military agenda of addressing social and transnational threats to peace and stability. In tension, those logics have corroborated to a slow and uneven process of change in security practices throughout the region. To understand how security governance in Brazil has changed over more than fifteen years since the GWOT was launched, one must first understand the security apparatus through which the new agenda of counter-terrorism (CT) and counter-insurgency was transformed and adapted. This chapter proposes to analyze how the logic of security governance changed over time by considering three levels of operationalization: (1) the international dimension under the GWOT and its focus on containing the spread of terrorism and armed violence by mapping insecure spaces and associated needs in terms of protection and development; (2) the regional dimension; (3) the national dimension. The last section will analyze how these agendas were socialized and operationalized in pacification policies inside those domestic spaces classified as “insecure” by considering the nexus between the state and civil society and how this relation was transformed over the last decades.
Scholars have debated the definition of terrorism since the creation of “terrorism” as a field of study. Differentiations between “state” and “non-state” terrorism also abound. Reversely, few have developed formal conceptualizations of counter-terrorism (CT) and its subtypes, state and non-state CT. This chapter helps fill this gap by presenting a formal conceptualization of non-state CT. By doing so, the chapter facilitates scientific studies of CT in all of its guises. To ensure that the conceptualization presented is compatible with a wide range of cases, periods, and places, the definitional method will be more analytical than synthetic. This said, the chapter also uses empirical examples from both the pre- and post-9/11 era. The chapter is divided into three sections: the first section reviews previous attempts to define non-state CT; the second section presents the historical specificity of the terms on which non-state CT is based, such as terrorism and state, but also associated terms, such as civil society and security; the third section presents some subtypes of non-state CT, and discusses their relevance to contemporary debates on “community-based” CT and its effects on civil societies and liberal democracies.
This book set out to analyze the legacies of the post-9/11 global war on terror, underscoring the impact of the counter-terrorism policy it produces on the operationality of CSOs. It examines countries that have been understudied despite their having one of the most repressive CTMs. It also re-examines other countries, while documenting unique issues that have emerged over the years as a result of the increasing pressures of counter-terrorism policy on CSOs, which was not captured by previous works. The book is also concerned about how CSOs made sense of and reacted to these new government security measures. We discovered from the contribution of authors specific underlying themes that illuminate states’ increasing constraints and exploitation of civil society organizations in the Americas, East and Western Europe, Southeast Asia, MENA and Sub-Saharan region. Thus, in this concluding chapter, we re-examine these themes highlighted in the introduction as a way of summarizing the importance of the discoveries of this book in aiding our thoughts on the intersections between CTMs and CSOs in various parts of the world.
The book concludes by reflecting on the contribution of this research to
understand other cases of negotiations with armed groups listed as terrorist
organisation as well as implications for policy. It argues that
international proscription makes pre-negotiations longer and more
protracted, in effect reshaping how peace processes can be initiated.
International proscription regimes criminalise both the actor and the act of
terrorism. The chapter calls for an end to this amalgamation between acts
and actors. By focussing on the acts instead, international policy would be
better able to consider the violent actions both of armed groups and those
of the state.
"This book examines the intersection between national and international counter-terrorism policies and civil society in numerous national and regional contexts. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) against the United States led to new waves of scholarship on the proliferation of terrorism and efforts to combat international terrorist groups, organizations, and networks. Civil society organizsations have been accused of serving as ideological grounds for the recruitment of potential terrorists and a channel for terrorist financing. Consequently, states around the world established new ranges of counter-terrorism measures that target the operations of cCivil society organizsations exclusively. Security practices by states have become a common trend and have assisted in the establishment of a “‘best practices”’ among non-liberal democratic or authoritarian states, and are deeply entrenched in their security infrastructures. In developing or newly democratized states (those still deemed democratically weak or fragile), these exceptional securities measures are used as a cover for repressing opposition groups considered by these states as threats to their national security and political power apparatuses. This book serves as a critical discussion accounting for the experiences of civil society in the enforcement of global security measures by governments in the America’s, Africa, Asia-Pacific, Central Asia, Europe (Western, Central, and Eastern), and the Middle East.
The post-9/ 11 global security regime and the securitization of civil society
Richard McNeil- Willson and Scott N. Romaniuk
This chapter maps the development of global security architecture in the context of the “new terrorism” security paradigm, and the impact this is having on civil society – creating challenges for community integration, securitizing political dissent, and potentially advancing fundamental social and economic inequalities. It argues that the inequalities of counter-terrorism represent an internalization of racism associated with colonialism into the heart of the Westernized (but not Western) state model through the language of security. This has blurred the line between what have been traditionally defined as “democratic,” “authoritarian,” and “hybrid” states to such an extent that they are rendered problematic in their usage in a counter-terror context. As such, more radical approaches to theorizing the relationship between terrorism and counter-terrorism need to be considered.
Chapter 7 brings together the analysis of the three empirical chapters by
assessing the overall impact of proscription on the dynamics of getting to
the table in the case of Colombia. It goes on to assess the lingering
effects of proscription throughout the negotiation process and in the post
agreement phase. It argues that the intense polarisation and stigmatisation
accompanying the terrorist framing still remained an issue for the ongoing
transition of the listed armed group into political life and for longer-term
reconciliation efforts in Colombia.
The impact of security policy on civil society in the United States
William A. Taylor
This chapter explores the critical relationship between counter-terrorism (CT) policy and civil society in the United States. First, the chapter details the historical context of the pre-9/11 security environment within the United States and then discusses major security policies that the 9/11 terrorist attacks prompted. This watershed event triggered seismic shifts in security policy aimed at combating international terrorism, and the resulting policy adjustments fundamentally altered civil society within the United States. Second, the chapter analyzes the various security frameworks established in the aftermath of 9/11 and considers their implications on the relations between the state and civil society in the United States. Third, the chapter considers the responses of CSOs to state CT policies. The chapter concludes with an overall assessment of how civil society within the United States changed after 9/11 in response to security policy and a projection of likely future state–civil society relations.