expectations of Western countries, notably the US. The latter country views the entire landscape of violence in South Asia through a linear lens, which overlooks intricate local and regional dynamics and tends to create friction in bilateral relations. A closer cooperation to counter terrorism can be fostered only if the geopolitical context is grasped, with an understanding that the route to stability in Afghanistan goes through Kashmir. The discussion reveals, though obliquely, that support for Afghan fighters by Pakistan may recede in the near future, and Pakistan may
"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.
. 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
returns, veiled Syrian wife in hand, to his parents’ farm in Tunis. A few days later, his father, Mohamed, denounces the radicalized son to the police ( The Economist , 2018 ; Joobeur, 2018 ). The plot of this short film by Meryam Joobeur describes a possible example of non-state counter-terrorism. But the film, which is called Brotherhood , can also be considered an example of
Introduction One of the fundamental points of debate in the world since 9/11 has been that of counter-terrorism. The events of 9/11 no doubt ushered the international community into a new realm of collective actions against terrorism, with the United Nations, European Union, United States, and many other states along with multilateral actors
1 Investigating the language of EU counter-terrorism: analytical techniques Introduction Research on counter-terrorism is united by a concern with the way in which various actors define, understand and respond to the threat of terrorism. However, beyond this broad commitment it is possible to identify a variety of approaches to the study of counter-terrorism that differ as a direct result of the implicit and explicit assumptions that each individual researcher makes about the social world. Traditional approaches to counter-terrorism predominantly begin from a
aspects: the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; the strategic dimensions of American oil policy; the operation and organisation of terrorist cells around the world; international security cooperation between nations; the fate of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay; the legal dimensions of counter-terrorism; new homeland security measures such as law-enforcement cooperation and immigration control; and the Bush
This book analyses the evolving Anglo-American counter-terror propaganda strategies that spanned the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as reconstruction, between 2001 and 2008. It offers insights into the transformation beyond this period, tracking many key developments as much as possible up to the time of writing (2013) and providing a retrospective on the 'war on terror'. Using empirical data located within multiple spheres, the book draws on sociology, political science and international relations, developing an interdisciplinary analysis of political communication in the international system. It shows how media technologies presented legal, structural and cultural problems for what were seen as rigid propaganda systems defined by their emergence in an old media system of sovereign states with stable target audiences. Propaganda successes and advances were an inconsistent by-product both of malfunction and of relationships, cultures and rivalries, both domestically and between the partners. The differing social relations of planners and propagandists to wider society create tensions within the 'machine', however leaders may want it to function. The book demonstrates that the 'messy' nature of bureaucracy and international systems as well as the increasingly fluid media environment are all important in shaping what actually happens. In a context of initial failures in formal coordination, the book stresses the importance of informal relationships to planners in the propaganda war. This situated Britain in an important yet precarious position within the Anglo-American propaganda effort, particularly in Iraq.
with Dr Sarah Leonard The external dimension of EU counter-terrorism and international actorness This chapter analyses the external dimension of EU counter-terrorism, a crucial aspect in the fight against international terrorism, which has been much and hotly debated (Reinares, 2000; Dubois, 2002; den Boer and Monar, 2002 ; Mitsilegas and Gilmore, 2007; Occhipinti, 2003
president to use America’s military might because, ultimately, ‘It’s what our fathers taught us’? 6 These shows make powerful, resonant, and consequential discursive interventions into policy debates, as is demonstrated by the fact it was to these shows that these three giants of American politics turned in explaining their lives and the challenges facing the US and its government. This chapter traces the interventions and impact of Homeland, 24 , and The West Wing on America’s world politics, with a particular focus on how Americans think and feel about counter-terrorism