Analyzing the Criminal Justice and Military Models of Counterterrorism: Evidence from the United States
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Analyzing the Criminal Justice and Military Models of Counterterrorism: Evidence from the United States By ©2017 Brittnee Carter Ph.D., University of Kansas, 2017 M.A., University of Washington, 2010 B.A., University of Notre Dame, 2008 Submitted to the graduate degree program in Political Science and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ______________________________ Chair: Mariya Y. Omelicheva ______________________________ Member: Nazli Avdan ______________________________ Member: Gail Buttorff ______________________________ Member: Donald Haider-Markel ______________________________ Member: Adrian Lewis Date Defended: May 9, 2017 ii This dissertation committee for Brittnee Carter certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Analyzing the Criminal Justice and Military Models of Counterterrorism: Evidence from the United States ____________________________________ Chair: Dr. Mariya Omelicheva Date Approved: May 9, 2017 iii Abstract States’ counterterrorism strategies have been categorized into the criminal justice and military models of counterterrorism. Currently, the international relations literature lacks a systematic exploration or theorization of these models, and relies mainly on broad conceptualizations and piecemeal evidence to make claims in reference to these two counterterrorism models. This dissertation examines the conceptual literature on the criminal justice and military models of counterterrorism, further theorizes these models, and empirically analyzes both quantitatively and qualitatively using evidence from the United States. Using data from the Global Terrorism Database and Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, spanning from 1970 to 2014, the quantitative analysis looks predominantly at the military model of counterterrorism in order to determine its relationship with terrorism and relevant domestic political processes. The qualitative analysis, comprised mainly of legal content analysis of the same temporal frame, investigates the conditions under which the models are employed, focusing especially on the criminal justice model. The findings suggest that criminal justice responses are employed mainly against perpetrators from Western nations and U.S. allies, while military responses are disproportionately used against Muslim individuals, especially those affiliated with al-Qaeda, Taliban, and al Shabab. The findings also suggest that both models have been equally employed before and after 9/11, calling into question claims from recent literature suggesting that military counterterrorism policy is a post-9/11 phenomenon. Finally, the results indicate that terrorism both directly and indirectly impacts military activity in the U.S. and, contrarily, that military activity is associated with increases in future supplies of terrorism. This suggests that military action alone may not be enough to combat terrorism. iv Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank my advisor and mentor Dr. Mariya Omelicheva for her continuous support in my Ph.D study and related research, for her belief in my capabilities, and for her continual encouragement and guidance which has made me a better scholar than I imagined I could have been. I would also like to thank the faculty of the Department of Political Science at the University of Kansas, with special gratitude for my committee members Dr. Nazli Avdan, Dr. Don Haider-Markel, and Dr. Adrian Lewis. A sincere thanks is due to Dr. Gail Buttorff for serving on my committee, but also for her continued support and encouragement in my methodological training, without which I would not have been able to attend such prestigious training programs as ICPSR and EITM. Dr. Paul Johnson and Dr. Jim Granato, University of Houston, have also been invaluable to my methodological training, for which I owe a debt of gratitude. I would like to give a special thanks to Dr. Brent Steele, University of Utah, who believed in me in my early Ph.D studies and taught me to believe in myself and my ability as an academic. Additional thanks is due to Dr. Paul Schumaker for the several years he devoted to helping me develop my teaching abilities and capacity for political theory. My Ph.D study was made easier by the staff of the KU Political Science Department. Linda Pickerel and Betty Jo Ross provided many important services and always did so with a smile and for that I am grateful. I would like to thank my fellow graduate students from KU, with a special mention to Anthony Ocepek, Benjamin Rogers, Dr. Ranya Ahmed, Ryan Daugherty, Dr. Luke Campbell, Steven Sylvester, Dr. Terilyn Huntington, Dr. Johnny Urbano, Dr. Brian Hanson, and Kristina v Youngblood. I would also like to thank my colleagues across the academic community, especially those from ICPSR, University of Houston, and University of Copenhagen. My friends from the University of Notre Dame and the University of Washington, especially Dr. David Gasperetti, Jessica Peyton Roberts, Dr. Nika Egorova, and Jennifer Alford, have provided me with both academic and moral support. A special thanks to my lifelong friends, Mike Lutin, Allie Bozovsky, Tom Tschida, Alicia Davis, Alexander Braenig, and the Powell and King families for their support and friendship for the last decade. Most importantly, I would like to thank my family; my grandparents, aunt, uncles, and cousins, especially Suzi, Patti, Jerry, Andrea, Andrew, Kevin, and the late Jeff and Jessica. My mother, Amy, and my sisters, Janay and Clareese, have always had confidence in me and taught me to never give up no matter how difficult or great the struggle may be. Through everything we have been through as a family, I am proud to complete this degree in honor of them. My partner Tom has supported me through the entirety of my Ph.D study and has always believed in me even during the times that I did not believe in myself. His care and encouragement has been essential to my success as an academic and as a person and I could not thank him more. vi Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Terrorism and Counterterrorism: Arriving at Conceptual Definitions ......................... 6 Terrorism .................................................................................................................................... 6 Counterterrorism ....................................................................................................................... 15 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 25 Chapter 2: U.S. Counterterrorism Responses ............................................................................... 26 Criminal Justice Responses to Terrorism in the U.S. ............................................................... 27 Military Responses to Terrorism in the U.S. ............................................................................ 33 The Call for a Global Counterterrorism Strategy ..................................................................... 38 Counterterrorism and the Observance of Domestic and International Law ............................. 40 A Complex Relationship of Government Response and Terrorism ......................................... 43 Shortcomings of the Counterterrorism Models ........................................................................ 48 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 52 Chapter 3: Theorizing the Counterterrorism Models .................................................................... 54 The Theory Building Process ................................................................................................... 54 Criminal Justice Model ............................................................................................................. 56 Military Model .......................................................................................................................... 61 Presentation of Hypotheses ....................................................................................................... 67 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 69 Chapter 4: Vector Autoregressive Analysis of the Military Model of Counterterrorism ............. 70 The Vector Autoregressive Model ............................................................................................ 70 Data and Measurement ............................................................................................................. 76 Analysis and Discussion ........................................................................................................... 83 vii Implications .............................................................................................................................. 92 Chapter 5: Qualitative Analysis of the Counterterrorism Models ................................................ 95 Concepts and Definitions .......................................................................................................... 95 Data and Methods ..................................................................................................................