Search results
resulting quest for justice against enduring evil – otherwise we would simply pursue the criminals responsible and let the bureaucracy of the justice system process them. Our fantasy of destruction drives our hysterical crusade against the perpetrators because we are complicit and guilt-ridden. The drama of crusade against terrorism belies our desire for terrorism, for Baudrillard. Other scholars have
2004. Indeed, it was former National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice (who had initially articulated the new approach to counter-terrorism) who now oversaw its implementation at the State Department as Secretary of State from 2005 to 2009. This public diplomacy campaign centred on three core principles: producing a positive vision of hope; advancing universal human rights
The importance of intelligence in counter-insurgency has long been recognised and is not disputed. 1 In Aden, in Northern Ireland, and in Western counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency operations carried out since 9/11, the expected and proclaimed value of interrogation as a source of intelligence has been emphasised by the military, civilian intelligence personnel and policy-makers. These first
justification presented intervention as part of the ‘war on terrorism’, in that it was claimed that Saddam Hussein’s regime had connections with al-Qaeda (a claim which was also subsequently found to be untrue). As suggested by the name given to the US mission – Operation Iraqi Freedom – a third line of justification was that the war would liberate the Iraqi people and install a democratic government, thereby
see how the memorial has come to occupy its prominent position within the cultural and architectural mitigation of death. In the contemporary era, we see the construction of large memorials – even memorial and museum complexes – on the sites of terrorist attack. This, in itself, is a development. In previous eras of response to terrorism, sites of destruction were marked with simple plaques. For
violence and acts of terrorism’. 51 It is not then, the use of force per se which is being condemned here, but rather the use of force by those party to the conflict. In a solidarist vein, it does not rule out the possibility of a legitimate use of force by a third party in order to protect or defend particular responsibilities, rights or values. By condemning
struggle against terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction. However, and some may regard this as unfortunate, they do not ‘speak with one voice’ on basic issues of principle since these often tend to involve their security identities. They are divided on issues pertaining to the role of norms in international affairs, and on how to achieve stability. The case studies indicate that the
their interpretation, was international terrorism – Ivanov even accused NATO of supporting Islamic terrorism. The leaders condemned the Kosovo Liberation Army and called for a joint struggle against separatism and terrorism in areas such as Kosovo and Chechnya. 43 After the end of the military operation, they urged other states to support Russia in its struggle against international terrorism, a problem ‘stretching
that it is, according to Putin, an irrelevant distraction from the need to tackle the ‘modern threats’ of terrorism and proliferation. 10 For Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, NATO enlargement also detracts from the need to build ‘together, on a collective and equal basis […] a united Europe without the longing for old dividing lines and without the malicious hopes of creating new
networked terrorism is not sourced from a specific region and cannot be reliably reduced to an identifiable set of individual actors with a fixed abode. The European Security Strategy (ESS), adopted by the Thessoloniki European Council in December 2003, singled out terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, regional conflicts, state failure and organised crime as