Traces the recent evolution of international terrorism against civilian and U.S. military targets, looks ahead to where terrorism is going, and assesses how it might be contained. The authors consider the threat of information-based terrorism and of weapons of mass destruction, with an emphasis on how changes in the sources and nature of terrorism may affect the use of unconventional terror. The authors propose counterterrorism strategies that address the growing problem of homeland defense.
"Together we must affirm that domestic terrorism has no place in our society." -President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism (June 2021) National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism (June 2021) conveys the Biden Administration's view of domestic terrorism and strategy on how to deal with it. What is domestic terrorism? As defined by this report, it is based on a range of violent ideological motivations, including racial bigotry and anti-government feeling, and it can take several forms, from lone actors and small groups to violent militias.
Chandler and Gunaratna employ their unparalleled expertise to probe the West's responses to the catastrophic attacks so indelibly seared into the history of the early twenty-first century, from 9/11 to the Madrid bombings to deadly strikes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Palestine, and elsewhere.
This volume shows us that in order to deal with today’s Fourth Generation asymmetric warfare by terrorist groups using conventional arms and weapons of mass destruction, we need a new ‘global networked’ approach. The contributors examine the various attempts that have been made to counter the latest wave of terrorism, including the US strikes against Afghanistan and Iraq, President George W. Bush's declaration of a ‘war against terrorism’, the creation of the US Department of Homeland Security, and the 9/11 Commission. Drawing from our experience with ‘Terrorism Early Warning’ and the co-production of counter-terrorism intelligence, this book explains the need for such a network and shows how it could be formed. It compiles the opinions of experts from clinical medicine, public policy, law enforcement and the military. These expert contributors identify the nature of a global counter-terrorism network, show how it could be created, and provide clear guidelines for gauging its future effectiveness. This book will be of great interest to all students of terrorism studies, US national security, international relations, and political science in general.
Since 9/11, counterterrorism has become a national and international priority. Research on violent extremism and terrorism, from homegrown threats to foreign fighters, has adapted accordingly but has not always translated into policymaking. Extremism can be traced to no single cause, and yet governments and law-enforcement agencies continue to spend millions on prevention efforts. Contributors to this book identify persistent challenges for counterterrorism and countering violent extremism and provide analysis from a variety of academic and professional perspectives. Countering Violent Extremism and Terrorism cautions against adopting a causal model to understand violent extremism and takes a critical look at how states have managed to cope with the global phenomenon of terrorism. By drawing on the expertise of researchers and practitioners from government, law enforcement, and the military, contributors identify past failures and offer guidance on how to correct these mistakes. With the collective goal of developing more effective strategies, the authors dispel common myths, discard counterproductive tactics, and point to countries in which policies have functioned as intended. As some terrorist organizations' influence wanes, others innovate and thrive, further challenging a state apparatus that is slow to adapt to these mutating threats. An essential and timely book, Countering Violent Extremism and Terrorism seeks to change how governments and policymakers consider and respond to security threats.
In this book, the author offers an approach to understanding and fighting the increase in domestic and international terrorism throughout the world. Citing diverse examples from around the globe, he demonstrates that domestic terrorist groups are usually no match for an advanced technological society which can successfully roll back terror without any significant curtailment of civil liberties. But he sees an even more potent threat from the new international terrorism which is increasingly the product of Islamic militants, who draw their inspiration and directives from Iran and its growing cadre of satellite states. The spread of fundamentalist Islamic terrorism, coupled with the possibility that Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, poses a more frightening threat from an adversary less rational and therefore less controllable than was Soviet Communism. How democracies can defend themselves against this new threat concludes this book.
In this paper, Michael Schmitt explores the legality of the attacks against Al Qaeda and the Taliban under the "jus ad bellum," that component of international law that governs when a State may resort to force as an instrument of national policy. Although States have conducted military counterterrorist operations in the past, the scale and scope of Operation Enduring Freedom may signal a sea change in strategies to defend against terrorism. This paper explores the normative limit on counterterrorist operations. Specifically, under what circumstances can a victim State react forcibly to an act of terrorism? Against whom? When? With what degree of severity? And for how long? The author contends that the attacks against Al Qaeda were legitimate exercises of the rights of individual and collective defense. They were necessary and proportional, and once the Taliban refused to comply with U.S. and United Nations demands to turn over the terrorists located in Afghanistan, it was legally appropriate for coalition forces to enter the country for the purpose of ending the ongoing Al Qaeda terrorist campaign. However, the attacks on the Taliban were less well grounded in traditional understandings of international law. Although the Taliban were clearly in violation of their legal obligation not to allow their territory to be used as a terrorist sanctuary, the author suggests that the degree and nature of the relationship between the Taliban and Al Qaeda may not have been such that the September 11 attacks could be attributed to the Taliban, thereby disallowing strikes against them in self-defense under traditional understandings of international law. Were the attacks, therefore, illegal? Not necessarily. Over the past half-century the international community's understanding of the international law governing the use of force by States has been continuously evolving. The author presents criteria likely to drive future assessments of the legality of counterterrorist operatio7.
