DOCSLIB.ORG

Published by the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University’S Edmund A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Published by the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University’S Edmund A Georgetown Security Studies Review Volume 6 | Issue 2 August 2018 A Publication of the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service Disclaimer The views expressed in Georgetown Security Studies Review do not necessarily represent those of the editors or staff of GSSR, the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, or Georgetown University. The editorial board of GSSR and its affiliated peer reviewers strive to verify the accuracy of all factual information contained in GSSR. However, the staffs of GSSR, the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, and Georgetown University make no warranties or representations regarding the completeness or accuracy of information contained in GSSR, and they assume no legal liability or responsibility for the content of any work contained therein. Copyright 2012-2017, Georgetown Security Studies Review. All rights reserved. ISSN 2474-8552 (print); ISSN 2474-8560 (online) GEORGETOWN SECURITY STUDIES REVIEW Published by the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service Editorial Board Rebekah H. Kennel, Editor-in-Chief Jack Rock Lucas, Deputy Editor Shannon Mizzi, Associate Editor for Africa Nicholas Bradford, Associate Editor for the Americas Brigitta Schuchert, Associate Editor for Indo-Pacific Luke Drabyn, Associate Editor for Europe Stan Sundel, Associate Editor for the Middle East Stephanie Pillion, Associate Editor for National Security & the Military Henry Appel, Associate Editor for South and Central Asia Max Freeman, Associate Editor for Technology & Cyber Security Sarah Gilkes, Associate Editor for Terrorism & Counterterrorism The Georgetown Security Studies Review is the official academic journal of Georgetown University’s Security Studies Program. Founded in 2012, the GSSR has also served as the official publication of the Center for Security Studies and publishes regular columns in its online Forum and occasional special edition reports. Access the Georgetown Security Studies Review online at http://gssr.georgetown.edu Connect on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/GeorgetownUniversityGSSR Follow the Georgetown Security Studies Review on Twitter at ‘@gssreview’ Contact the Editor-in-Chief at [email protected] Table of Contents Trump’s First Year: Analyzing the Trump Administration’s Use of Drone 6 Strikes as a Counterterrorism Strategy in 2017 Rebecca Malone Urgent Reasons to Modernize and Strengthen The Espionage Act and a 19 Framework to Do So; A Comparative Study of Convicted Spies and Four Prominent Leaks: The Pentagon Papers, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Chelsea Manning, and Edward Snowden Paula A. Doyle Rationale and Information Strategy to Enable Internal Resistance in 36 North Korea David C. McDonald A New Strategy for Syria: How Coercive Diplomacy Can Deter Assad 52 from Using Chemical Weapons Stephanie Pillion Abu Musab al-Suri Goes Online: Conditions for the Success of Jihadist 66 Online Strategies Sarah Marie Gresser Post-Apartheid Reconciliation in South Africa’s Military and Society 75 Noah Becker Paramilitary Financing in Northern Ireland, 1969–1998: How Arms 86 Deals, Crime, and International Networks Fueled the Troubles David de Sola 4 Georgetown Security Studies Review Note from the Editor It is with great pleasure that we present the Georgetown Security Studies Review Volume 6, Issue 2. We hope you enjoy the new design as much as the contents within. Inside this Issue our authors explore a wide variety of security topics drawing upon a broad range of regions, functional areas, and history. Given the eclectic mix of articles, I am certain this publication will have something of interest for every reader. I would like to thank the following for their support and guidance: Dr. Keir Lieber Annie Kraft Jordan Moeny Mariah Kim Kathryn Owens, Georgetown University Press Lastly this publication would not be possible without the efforts of our peer reviewers who worked very closely with the Editorial Board to produce the publication before you. Best wishes, Rebekah H. Kennel Editor-in-Chief August 2018 Volume 6 | Issue 2 5 Trump’s First Year: Analyzing the Trump Administration’s Use of Drone Strikes as a Counterterrorism Strategy in 2017 Rebecca Malone Drone strikes have been a key aspect of United States’ counterterrorism strategy since the sec- ond term of the George W. Bush adminaistration and increased in use during Barack Obama’s terms in office. The Donald Trump administration continues to capitalize on previous administrations’ coun- terterrorism strategies, increasing the number of strikes and expanding areas of active hostility to allow for quicker turn-around on decisions to carry out strikes. Counterterrorism strikes outside of active battlefields increased almost threefold from 2016 to 2017, with the United States conducting nearly 200 strikes outside of Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan in 2017. While the Trump administration has bolstered its counterterrorism campaign, it has not introduced a formal counterterrorism strategy. A formal counterterrorism strategy is necessary to ensure that strikes successfully decapitate leadership and deter jihadist networks worldwide. Only by implementing a formal counterterrorism strategy can the Trump administration justify its use of strikes as an effective and valuable counterterrorism strategy. Since President Donald Trump’s hold in these areas. It is particularly perti- inauguration in January 2017, the United nent for operations involving air strikes from States has conducted nearly 200 drone strikes drones as well as manned aircraft, but it is against global jihadist networks outside of also used when authorizing special operations active war zones. Strikes outside of active raids. This is because “in an area of active hos- war zones increased approximately 285 per- tilities, the military or the Central Intelligence cent between 2016 and 2017, according to Agency (CIA) would be able to make the call data from the Foundation for the Defense of themselves about whether it was appropriate Democracies (FDD).1 This increase is a no- or not to release a weapon from a drone.”4 ticeable change in strike quantity and scope Thus, designating an area of active hostilities of the United States’ counterterrorism op- would grant the military and the CIA the au- erations from the Obama administration. thority to launch a strike without having to go Under the Obama administration, through the bureaucratic White House sign- military commanders could only authorize ing process, requiring a decision for a drone strikes in “areas of active hostilities.” “Areas strike to be personally authorized by the Prin- of active hostilities” is a term coined by the cipal of the nominating operating agency, re- Obama administration in 2013 to identify ar- viewed and approved by Principals and Dep- eas where U.S. troops can operate with legal uties of the National Security Council, and protections in places where war has not been then presented to the President for decision.5 declared.2 Designating an area of active hostil- While the Obama administration only des- ities is not the same as declaring war, nor does ignated Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and certain it allow the president to bypass congressional areas of Libya as “areas of active hostilities;” approval governing U.S. troop deployments. the Trump administration expanded those The term was meant to limit the areas where the Obama-era designations to include Yemen, military could operate freely in expansive geo- Somalia, Pakistan, and the entirety of Libya.6 graphic conflicts like the global war on terror. By expanding these Obama-era au- An area of active hostilities is essen- thorities, the Trump administration increased tially an area of undeclared war.3 Although the United States’ counterterrorism cam- there is no declaration of war, the laws of war paign in the Middle East and North Afri- 6 Georgetown Security Studies Review ca. This strike quantity and scope change of Strikes as a U.S. Counterterrorism Strategy the drone campaign demonstrates a shift in Since the second term of the George the overall U.S. counterterrorism strategy to W. Bush administration, drone strikes have focus more on regions where the U.S. mili- emerged as the United States’ primary strat- tary does not have an active ground presence. egy in the global war on terror. The Bush ad- It is important to compare the Unit- ministration introduced strikes as a method to ed States’ counterterrorism strategy and use weaken terrorism networks in ungoverned re- of drones under the Obama and Trump ad- gions where U.S.-led ground operations were ministrations and analyze the objectives of unfeasible due to the danger to personnel, the Trump administration’s shift in strategy the large scope of terrorism networks, Amer- to determine the effectiveness of the Trump ica’s relative lack of soft power in the Mid- administration’s strategy. There are no interna- dle East, and the absence of willing govern- tional laws or frameworks regulating the U.S. mental partners. The Bureau of Investigative government’s use of armed drones, wheth- Journalism, an independent and non-profit er in active combat zones or outside areas of investigative journalism organization based active hostilities. The guidelines that are in in the United Kingdom, estimates the Bush place within the United States are largely the administration oversaw 57 strikes, the major- result of Executive decisions, such as Presi- ity of which took place in Pakistan’s border
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Foreign Terrorist Organizations
    Order Code RL32223 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Foreign Terrorist Organizations February 6, 2004 Audrey Kurth Cronin Specialist in Terrorism Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Huda Aden, Adam Frost, and Benjamin Jones Research Associates Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Foreign Terrorist Organizations Summary This report analyzes the status of many of the major foreign terrorist organizations that are a threat to the United States, placing special emphasis on issues of potential concern to Congress. The terrorist organizations included are those designated and listed by the Secretary of State as “Foreign Terrorist Organizations.” (For analysis of the operation and effectiveness of this list overall, see also The ‘FTO List’ and Congress: Sanctioning Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations, CRS Report RL32120.) The designated terrorist groups described in this report are: Abu Nidal Organization (ANO) Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade Armed Islamic Group (GIA) ‘Asbat al-Ansar Aum Supreme Truth (Aum) Aum Shinrikyo, Aleph Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA) Communist Party of Philippines/New People’s Army (CPP/NPA) Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group, IG) HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM) Hizballah (Party of God) Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) Jemaah Islamiya (JI) Al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad) Kahane Chai (Kach) Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK, KADEK) Lashkar-e-Tayyiba
    [Show full text]
  • Southwestern Journal of International Law
    \\jciprod01\productn\s\swt\24-1\toc241.txt unknown Seq: 1 9-MAR-18 8:49 SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW VOLUME XXIV 2018 NUMBER 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SYMPOSIUM FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW S O N T H E GLOBAL STAGE: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE JOHN MOSS AND THE ROOTS OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT: WORLDWIDE IMPLICATIONS .................................... 1 Michael R. Lemov & Nate Jones RALPH NADER, LONE CRUSADER? THE ROLE OF CONSUMER AND PUBLIC INTEREST ADVOCATES IN THE HISTORY OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ....................................................... 41 Tom McClean Articles ARGENTINA’S SOLUTION TO THE MICHAEL BROWN TRAVESTY: A ROLE FOR THE COMPLAINANT VICTIM IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS ... 73 Federico S. Efron MARTIAL LAW IN INDIA: THE DEPLOYMENT OF MILITARY UNDER THE ARMED FORCES SPECIAL POWERS ACT, 1958 ................... 117 Khagesh Gautam © 2018 by Southwestern Law School \\jciprod01\productn\s\swt\24-1\toc241.txt unknown Seq: 2 9-MAR-18 8:49 Notes & Comments A CRITIQUE OF PERINCEK ¸ V. SWITZERLAND: INCORPORATING AN INTERNATIONAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT IS THE MORE PRUDENT APPROACH TO GENOCIDE DENIAL CASES ........................... 147 Shant N. Nashalian A CUTE COWBOY STOLE OUR MONEY: APPLE, IRELAND, AND WHY THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION SHOULD REVERSE THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION’S DECISION .................. 177 Chantal C. Renta Review BOOK REVIEW PHILIPPE SANDS, EAST WEST STREET: ON THE ORIGINS OF “GENOCIDE” AND “CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY” (ALFRED A. KNOPF ED., 2016) ...................................... 209 Vik Kanwar \\jciprod01\productn\s\swt\24-1\boe241.txt unknown Seq: 3 9-MAR-18 8:49 SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW VOLUME XXIV 2018 NUMBER 1 Editor-in-Chief SHANT N.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dublin and Monaghan Bombings
    Tithe an Oireachtais An Comhchoiste um Dhlí agus Ceart, Comhionannas, Cosaint agus Cearta na mBan Tuarascáil Eatramhach maidir leis an Tuarascáil ón gCoimisiún Fiosrúcháin Neamhspleách faoi Bhuamáil Bhaile Átha Cliath agus Mhuineacháin Nollaig 2003 _________________________ Houses of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights Interim Report on the Report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings December 2003 Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights Interim Report on the Report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings CONTENTS Interim Report Pages 1 to 3 Appendices A. Orders of Reference and Powers of Joint Committee B. Membership of Joint Committee. C. Motions of the Dáil and Seanad D. Mr Justice Barron’s Statement to the Oireachtas Committee E. The Report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights Interim Report on the Report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan Bombings The Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights wishes to express it’s deepest sympathy with the victims and relatives of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974. As has been stated by Mr Justice Henry Barron, “the true cost of these atrocities in human terms is incalculable. In addition to the loss of innocent lives, hundreds more were scarred by physical and emotional injuries. The full story of suffering will never be known and it is ongoing in many cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Conflict Transformation and the Loyalist Paramilitaries of Northern Ireland
    “Taking Responsibility”: Conflict Transformation and the Loyalist Paramilitaries of Northern Ireland Britt Sloan April 2011 Senior Honors Thesis International Relations, Tufts University Advisors: Eileen Babbitt, The Fletcher School Kelly Greenhill, Tufts University ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank the leadership of the Ulster Defense Association, the Ulster Volunteer Force, the Ulster Political Research Group, and the Progressive Unionist Party for their generous time and contributions to this work. Their willingness to welcome me into their communities afforded me opportunities to acquire insights that I would otherwise have never been able to gain, and their honesty in explaining a troubled history and a hopeful future was truly enlightening. In addition, thank you to those who offered advice and analysis throughout my travels in Belfast and upon my return home. I would also like to acknowledge my advisors, Professor Eileen Babbitt for her gracious acceptance of an undergraduate advisee and for her unstinting encouragement and Professor Kelly Greenhill for her astute critiques and for making time in her busy schedule. I would like to give a special thank you to Allan Leonard of the Northern Ireland Foundation for his incredible mentorship, Quintin Oliver of Stratagem for sharing with me his endless networks, and Tony Novosel for his constant enthusiasm and guidance. Although they had no obligation to support my research, they have always made themselves available to discuss, debate, and advise. Most importantly, this research would not have been possible without the financial support of Sherman Teichman and the Tufts Institute for Global Leadership and of the Tufts Undergraduate Research Fund. Finally, thank you to all those who are “taking responsibility” for conflict transformation and working to build peaceful societies.
    [Show full text]
  • To Die a Noble Death: Blood Sacrifice and the Legacy of the Easter Rising and the Battle of the Ommes in Northern Ireland History" (2009)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DigitalCommons@Macalester College Macalester College DigitalCommons@Macalester College History Honors Projects History Department Spring 2009 To Die a Noble Death: Blood Sacrifice nda the Legacy of the Easter Rising and the Battle of the Somme in Northern Ireland History Anne L. Reeder Macalester College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/history_honors Part of the Cultural History Commons, European History Commons, History of Gender Commons, Literature in English, British Isles Commons, Military History Commons, Political History Commons, and the Race, Ethnicity and Post-Colonial Studies Commons Recommended Citation Reeder, Anne L., "To Die a Noble Death: Blood Sacrifice and the Legacy of the Easter Rising and the Battle of the ommeS in Northern Ireland History" (2009). History Honors Projects. Paper 6. http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/history_honors/6 This Honors Project is brought to you for free and open access by the History Department at DigitalCommons@Macalester College. It has been accepted for inclusion in History Honors Projects by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Macalester College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To Die a Noble Death: Blood Sacrifice and the Legacy of the Easter Rising and the Battle of the Somme in Northern Ireland History Anne Reeder History Thesis Advisor: Andrea Robertson Cremer Committee Members: Casey Jarrin and Peter Wiesensel Spring 2009 1 Abstract In 1916, under the pressurized conditions of the Great War, two violent events transpired that altered the state of Anglo-Irish relations: the Easter Rising and the Battle of the Somme.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of the Irish-American Political Identity and Political Power and Its Effects on the Good Friday Agreement
    Irish Blood, American Heart: The Development of the Irish-American Political Identity and Political Power and Its Effects on the Good Friday Agreement Senior Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Arts and Sciences Brandeis University The Department of Politics Jytte Klausen, Advisor The Department of History Winston Bowman, Advisor In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts By Catherine Rosch April 2016 Copyright by Catherine Rosch Committee Members Jytte Klausen Winston Bowman Mark Hulliung Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge Professor Klausen and Professor Bowman for their dedication and encouragement as I’ve worked on this thesis. Thank you so much, both of your, for your patience and guidance. I would also like to thank my additional reader, Professor Hulliung, for reading my thesis and providing me with invaluable feedback. I would also, of course, like to thank my parents, Tom and Debbie, for always supporting me academically and encouraging me to follow my niche interests. Additionally, I would like to thank my twin sister, Amelia, for always encouraging me, even if she refuses to read my thesis. I also need to thank Professor Michael Willrich for forcing me to challenge myself as a writer, a historian, a researcher, and a person since taking my first class with him as a first-year. In Ireland, I was lucky enough to take a class with Professor Jennifer Todd at University College Dublin. Without her class, I would not have the knowledge base that allowed me to explore the American role in the conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Organizational Fragmentation and the Trajectory of Militant Splinter Groups
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2015 Organizational Fragmentation and the Trajectory of Militant Splinter Groups Evan James Perkoski University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Perkoski, Evan James, "Organizational Fragmentation and the Trajectory of Militant Splinter Groups" (2015). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1943. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1943 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1943 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Organizational Fragmentation and the Trajectory of Militant Splinter Groups Abstract Militant organizations commonly break down and split apart, with new groups emerging from the ranks of existing organizations. From Syria to Iraq to Afghanistan, militant groups have splintered and proliferated in this way, creating fragmented oppositions that significantly complicate the conflict landscape. This process of organizational splintering historically has created some of the deadliest and most well known organizations including Al Shabaab, Black September, and the Real IRA. However, at other times the new organizations have quickly disappeared, failing to impact the conflict in any meaningful way.What explains this variation in the trajectory of militant splinter groups over time? Specifically, this dissertation explores why some organizational fractures produce new groups that are durable and increasingly radicalized, while others merely fall apart. This is an important topic that has ramifications for how academics and policymakers alike understand the behavior of specific actors and also the evolution of fragmented conflicts around the globe. I develop a new theory to explain variation in rates of survival and radicalization that focuses on the content and the consistency of internal organizational preferences.
    [Show full text]
  • JOURNAL of CROSS BORDER STUDIES in IRELAND No
    THE JOURNAL OF CROSS BORDER STUDIES IN IRELAND No. 4 with information about the CENTRE FOR CROSS BORDER STUDIES (including 2008 annual report) Spring 2009 - Year 10 featuring an interview with Northern Ireland First Minister Peter Robinson 1 JOURNAL OF CROSS BORDER STUDIES IN IRELAND No.4 THE JOURNAL OF CROSS BORDER STUDIES IN IRELAND Cartoon by Martyn Turner The Centre is part-financed by the European Union’s European Regional Development Fund through the INTERREG IVA Cross-border Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body Editor: Andy Pollak ISBN: 978-1-906444-22-8 3 JOURNAL OF CROSS BORDER STUDIES IN IRELAND No.4 The Minister for Education and Science, Ms Mary Hanafin TD, launches the 2008 ‘Journal of Cross Border Studies in Ireland’. From left to right: Mr Niall Holohan, Southern Deputy Joint Secretary, North/South Ministerial Council; Professor Ferdinand von Prondzynski, President, Dublin City University; Ms Hanafin; HE David Reddaway, British Ambassador to Ireland; Ms Mary Bunting, Northern Joint Secretary, North/South Ministerial Council; Dr Chris Gibson, CCBS Chairman; Mr Michael Kelly, Chairman, Higher Education Authority. CONTENTS A word from the Chairman 05 Chris Gibson “Business to be done and benefits to be gained”: The views 11 of Northern Ireland’s First Minister, Peter Robinson, on North-South cooperation What role for North-South economic cooperation in 19 a time of recession? Interviews with six business leaders and economists Andy Pollak and Michael D’Arcy Cross-border banking in an era of financial crisis:
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Ireland: the Peace Process, Ongoing Challenges, and U.S. Interests
    Northern Ireland: The Peace Process, Ongoing Challenges, and U.S. Interests Updated September 10, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R46259 SUMMARY R46259 Northern Ireland: The Peace Process, Ongoing September 10, 2021 Challenges, and U.S. Interests Kristin Archick Between 1969 and 1999, roughly 3,500 people died as a result of political violence in Northern Specialist in European Ireland, which is one of four component “nations” of the United Kingdom (UK). The conflict, Affairs often referred to as “the Troubles,” has its origins in the 1921 division of Ireland and has reflected a struggle between different national, cultural, and religious identities. Protestants in Northern Ireland largely define themselves as British and support remaining part of the UK (unionists). Most Catholics in Northern Ireland consider themselves Irish, and many desire a united Ireland (nationalists). Successive U.S. Administrations and many Members of Congress have actively supported the Northern Ireland peace process. For decades, the United States has provided development aid through the International Fund for Ireland (IFI). In recent years, congressional hearings have focused on the peace process, police reforms, human rights, and addressing Northern Ireland’s legacy of violence (often termed dealing with the past). Some Members also are concerned about how Brexit—the UK’s withdrawal as a member of the European Union (EU) in January 2020—is affecting Northern Ireland. The Peace Agreement: Progress to Date and Ongoing Challenges In 1998, the UK and Irish governments and key Northern Ireland political parties reached a negotiated political settlement. The resulting Good Friday Agreement, or Belfast Agreement, recognized that a change in Northern Ireland’s constitutional status as part of the UK can come about only with the consent of a majority of the people in Northern Ireland (as well as with the consent of a majority in Ireland).
    [Show full text]
  • Why Militant Groups Fight Each Other
    Economics of Security Working Paper Series Eric van Um Why Militant Groups Fight Each Other: The Role of Support, Political Objectives and Revenge April 2012 Economics of Security Working Paper 64 This publication is an output of EUSECON, a research project supported by the European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme. Economics of Security is an initiative managed by DIW Berlin Economics of Security Working Paper Series Correct citation: Van Um, E. (2012). “Why Militant Groups Fight Each Other: The Role of Support, Political Objectives and Revenge”. Economics of Security Working Paper 64, Berlin: Economics of Security. First published in 2012 © Eric van Um 2012 ISSN: 1868-0488 For further information, please contact: Economics of Security, c/o Department of Development and Security, DIW Berlin – German Institute for Economic Research, Mohrenstr. 58, 10117 Berlin, Germany. Tel: +49 (0)30 89 789-277 Email: [email protected] Website: www.economics-of-security.eu Economics of Security is an initiative managed by DIW Berlin Why militant groups fight each other: The role of support, political objectives and revenge1 Eric van Um2 Most of the research on terrorism studies the relationship between militant groups and targeted states. This means that we actually know little about the role of violence in inter- group relationships. Previous research has claimed that such forms of violence occur regularly but underlying patterns and motives remain under-researched. This paper seeks to advance understanding of inter-terrorist group violence both among groups with shared and competing objectives. It particularly aims to analyze the characteristics of inter-group violence and also tries to determine if such violence reflects strategic decision-making or if it rather stems from expressive motives.
    [Show full text]
  • A Historical Materialist Analysis of the Theological Turn of Alain Badiou
    Archives of Defeat? A historical materialist analysis of the theological turn of Alain Badiou. Thomas Matthew Rudman A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Department of English, Manchester Metropolitan University for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2015 1 ABSTRACT This thesis offers a historical materialist analysis of the use of messianic discourses in contemporary theoretical and literary texts. It focuses on the way the recent ‘theological turn’ in Marxist theory relates to two major historical developments: the ascendency of neoliberal capitalism and the perceived absence of any socialist alternative. In theoretical terms, it produces a symptomatic analysis of Alain Badiou and his attempt to re-invigorate communist militancy via the figure of Saint Paul. Rather than follow Badiou’s avowedly atheistic turn to Paul, I undertake a materialist analysis of the texts of early Christianity in order to show that their style of ideological and political subversion is not incompatible with the egalitarian aims of Marxism. I extend this analysis of the radical potentiality of Christian discourses by examining the significance of messianic discourses in contemporary fiction in novels by Eoin McNamee and Roberto Bolaño. Both novelists deploy the conventions of crime fiction to narrate stories of revolutionary disillusionment and the impact of neoliberal economics in the north of Ireland and the Mexico-US border. My analysis focuses on issues of literary form and how the use of messianic imagery produces formal ruptures in the texts which trouble or disturb their manifest ideologies, notably the sense of revolutionary disillusionment and the notion that there is no longer any possibility of radical social change.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Militant Groups Fight Each Other: the Role of Support, Political Objectives and Revenge
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics van Um, Eric Working Paper Why Militant Groups Fight Each Other: The Role of Support, Political Objectives and Revenge Economics of Security Working Paper, No. 64 Provided in Cooperation with: German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin) Suggested Citation: van Um, Eric (2012) : Why Militant Groups Fight Each Other: The Role of Support, Political Objectives and Revenge, Economics of Security Working Paper, No. 64, Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW), Berlin This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/119390 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Economics of Security Working Paper Series Eric van Um Why Militant Groups Fight Each Other: The Role of Support, Political Objectives and Revenge April 2012 Economics of Security Working Paper 64 This publication is an output of EUSECON, a research project supported by the European Commission’s Seventh Framework Programme.
    [Show full text]