DOCSLIB.ORG

THESIS-20-12-2007-FINAL2.Pdf (1.187Mb)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THESIS-20-12-2007-FINAL2.Pdf (1.187Mb) Al-Qaeda’s Quest for Non-Conventional Weapons, 1996-2006 The history behind the hype by Anne Stenersen Master’s Thesis in Arabic Spring 2008 Department of Culture Studies and Oriental Languages University of Oslo Summary The aim of the thesis has been to describe the nature of al-Qaeda’s interest in non- conventional weapons, as reflected by the network’s own statements and activities in the period from 1996-2006. The analysis has been divided into two parts: First, I have critically examined primary and secondary source material in order to develop a comprehensive understanding of the history of al-Qaeda’s pursuit for non-conventional weapons. Second, I have discussed why there is a lack of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) innovation within the al-Qaeda network. The conclusion to the first part is that the al-Qaeda network’s interest in using unconventional means appears much lower than commonly anticipated. Al-Qaeda’s efforts have been concentrated on crude and easily obtainable CBRN materials, not on developing actual warfare agents. Also, a preference for conventional weapons and tactics is evident on all levels within the network. There are no strong indications that al-Qaeda’s interest for non- conventional weapons has increased after 2001. With regards to the lack of CBRN innovation, I conclude that the al-Qaeda network clearly lacks some of the characteristics typical of past ‘CBRN terrorists’, such as a millenarian ideology or an ‘expressive attachment’ to this particular type of weapon. In addition, however, I argue that al-Qaeda’s networked structure itself prevents innovation, rather than promoting it. There are at least two possible explanations for this: first, the global nature of the network makes mobility an alternative to innovation; and second, al-Qaeda’s loose organizational structure increases the need for carrying out operations that can immediately be identified with the al-Qaeda ‘brand’. 2 Table of contents SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 PREFACE.............................................................................................................................................................. 5 A NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION................................................................................................................... 6 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 TERMS AND DEFINITIONS ...................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 OUTLINE OF THE THESIS...................................................................................................................... 14 2 FRAMEWORK FOR MY APPROACH................................................................................................. 15 2.1 FOUNDATIONAL PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE STUDY OF MILITANT ISLAMISM .................................... 15 2.2 REVIEW OF EXISTING LITERATURE...................................................................................................... 16 2.2.1 Literature describing al-Qaeda’s quest for CBRN weapons......................................................... 16 2.2.2 Literature on the phenomenon of CBRN terrorism ....................................................................... 19 2.2.3 Literature on the process of innovation in militant organizations ................................................ 24 2.3 HOW I WILL USE THIS FRAMEWORK AS SUPPORT FOR MY ANALYSIS ................................................... 28 3 METHODS AND SOURCES ................................................................................................................... 31 4 BACKGROUND ON CBRN TERRORISM AND AL-QAEDA ........................................................... 34 4.1 THE PHENOMENON OF ‘CBRN TERRORISM’........................................................................................ 34 4.1.1 The history of CBRN terrorism ..................................................................................................... 34 4.1.2 How significant is the phenomenon?............................................................................................. 35 4.2 AL-QAEDA AND THE GLOBAL JIHADI CURRENT................................................................................... 37 4.2.1 What is al-Qaeda?......................................................................................................................... 37 4.2.2 Al-Qaeda’s goal and strategy........................................................................................................ 39 4.2.3 Are all tactics acceptable? ............................................................................................................ 40 5 THE HISTORY OF AL-QAEDA’S QUEST FOR CBRN WEAPONS................................................ 42 5.1 AL-QAEDA CENTRAL .......................................................................................................................... 42 5.1.1 Written and oral statements .......................................................................................................... 42 5.1.2 Actual plans and activities ............................................................................................................ 50 5.1.3 The CBRN interest of Al-Qaeda central........................................................................................ 55 5.2 AL-QAEDA AFFILIATES ....................................................................................................................... 57 5.2.1 The case of Iraq............................................................................................................................. 58 5.2.2 The CBRN interest of al-Qaeda affiliates in Iraq.......................................................................... 62 5.3 AL-QAEDA LOCALS ............................................................................................................................ 63 5.3.1 Jose Padilla................................................................................................................................... 64 5.3.2 The Courneuve-Romainville group (“The Chechen Network”).................................................... 65 5.3.3 Kamal Bourgass and the “ricin plot” ........................................................................................... 69 5.3.4 Dhiren Barot ................................................................................................................................. 72 5.3.5 The CBRN interest of al-Qaeda locals .......................................................................................... 75 5.4 AL-QAEDA SYMPATHIZERS................................................................................................................. 76 5.4.1 Jihadism Online ............................................................................................................................ 76 5.4.2 Chemical and biological manuals................................................................................................. 81 5.4.3 Radiological and Nuclear manuals............................................................................................... 90 5.4.4 The nature of online CBRN discussions ........................................................................................ 93 5.4.5 The CBRN interest of the al-Qaeda sympathizers......................................................................... 96 5.5 SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS...................................................................................................... 97 5.5.1 What kinds of CBRN weapons are al-Qaeda interested in?.......................................................... 97 5.5.2 How important are CBRN weapons in relation to other types of weapons and tactics?............... 98 5.5.3 How has al-Qaeda’s interest in CBRN weapons developed?........................................................ 99 6 EXPLAINING THE LACK OF CBRN INNOVATION...................................................................... 100 6.1 CBRN WEAPONS ARE NOT NECESSARY TO OBTAIN THE GOAL .......................................................... 100 6.2 LACK OF ‘EMOTIONAL ATTRACTION’ TO CBRN ............................................................................... 102 6.3 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ......................................................................................................... 104 3 7 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................ 107 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................. 109 ARABIC SOURCES ............................................................................................................................................ 109 Books, articles and communiques.............................................................................................................. 109 Jihadi training manuals............................................................................................................................. 110 Jihadi websites..........................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “New” Vs. “Old” Terrorism*
    The Debate over “New” vs. “Old” Terrorism* Prepared for presentation at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois, August 30-September 2, 2007 Martha Crenshaw Center for International Security and Cooperation Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305-6165 [email protected] Since 9/11, many policy makers, journalists, consultants, and scholars have become convinced that the world confronts a “new” terrorism unlike the terrorism of the past.1 Thus the government and policy elites have been blamed for not recognizing the danger of the “new” terrorism in the 1990s and therefore failing to prevent the disaster of 9/11.2 Knowledge of the “old” or traditional terrorism is sometimes considered irrelevant at best, and obsolete and anachronistic, even harmful, at worst. Some of those who argue 1 Examples include Bruce Hoffman, Inside Terrorism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), although Hoffman is sometimes ambivalent; Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon, The Age of Sacred Terror: Radical Islam’s War Against America (New York Random House, 2003); Walter Laqueur, The New Terrorism: Fanaticism and the Arms of Mass Destruction (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999); and Ian O. Lesser, et al., Countering the New Terrorism (Santa Monica: The Rand Corporation, 1999). Ambassador L. Paul Bremer contributed “A New Strategy for the New Face of Terrorism” to a special issue of The National Interest (Thanksgiving 2001), pp. 23-30. A recent post 9/11 overview is Matthew J. Morgan, “The Origins of the New Terrorism,” Parameters (the journal of the U.S. Army War College), 34, 1 (Spring 2004), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2002 National Security Strategy: the Foundation Of
    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Graduate Program in International Studies Dissertations Summer 2013 The 2002 aN tional Security Strategy: The Foundation of a Doctrine of Preemption, Prevention, or Anticipatory Action Troy Lorenzo Ewing Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds Part of the American Politics Commons, Defense and Security Studies Commons, International Law Commons, Terrorism Studies Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Ewing, Troy L.. "The 2002 aN tional Security Strategy: The oundF ation of a Doctrine of Preemption, Prevention, or Anticipatory Action" (2013). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, International Studies, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/ 8f8q-9g35 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds/46 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Program in International Studies at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE 2002 NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY: THE FOUNDATION OF A DOCTRINE OF PREEMPTION, PREVENTION, OR ANTICIPATORY ACTION by Troy Lorenzo Ewing B.A. May 1992, Rutgers University M.B.A. May 2001, Webster University M.S.S.I. May 2007, National Intelligence University A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL STUDIES OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2013 ABSTRACT THE 2002 NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY: THE FOUNDATION OF A DOCTRINE OF PREEMPTION, PREVENTION, OR ANTICIPATORY ACTION Troy Lorenzo Ewing Old Dominion University, 2013 Director: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT Title of Document: ROBOTICS and the FUTURE OF
    ABSTRACT Title of Document: ROBOTICS AND THE FUTURE OF INTERNATIONAL ASYMMETRIC WARFARE Nicholas Grossman, Doctor of Philosophy, 2013 Directed By: Professor George Quester, Department of Government and Politics In the post-Cold War world, the world's most powerful states have cooperated or avoided conflict with each other, easily defeated smaller state governments, engaged in protracted conflicts against insurgencies and resistance networks, and lost civilians to terrorist attacks. This dissertation explores various explanations for this pattern, proposing that some non-state networks adapt to major international transitions more quickly than bureaucratic states. Networks have taken advantage of the information technology revolution to enhance their capabilities, but states have begun to adjust, producing robotic systems with the potential to grant them an advantage in asymmetric warfare. ROBOTICS AND THE FUTURE OF ASYMMETRIC WARFARE By Nicholas Grossman Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2013 Advisory Committee: Professor George Quester, Chair Professor Paul Huth Professor Shibley Telhami Professor Piotr Swistak Professor William Nolte Professor Keith Olson © Copyright by Nicholas Grossman 2013 Dedication To Marc and Tracy Grossman, who made this all possible, and to Alyssa Prorok, who made it all worth it. ii Acknowledgements Thank you to my dissertation committee for all the advice and support, Anne Marie Clark and Cissy Roberts for making everything run smoothly, Jacob Aronson and Rabih Helou for the comments and encouragement, Alyssa Prorok for invaluable help, and especially to George Quester for years of mentorship.
    [Show full text]
  • Policing Terrorism
    Policing Terrorism A Review of the Evidence Darren Thiel Policing Terrorism A Review of the Evidence Darren Thiel Policing Terrorism A Review of the Evidence Darren Thiel © 2009: The Police Foundation All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of The Police Foundation. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Police Foundation. Enquires concerning reproduction should be sent to The Police Foundation at the address below. ISBN: 0 947692 49 5 The Police Foundation First Floor Park Place 12 Lawn Lane London SW8 1UD Tel: 020 7582 3744 www.police-foundation.org.uk Acknowledgements This Review is indebted to the Barrow Cadbury Trust which provided the grant enabling the work to be conducted. The author also wishes to thank the academics, researchers, critics, police officers, security service officials, and civil servants who helped formulate the initial direction and content of this Review, and the staff at the Police Foundation for their help and support throughout. Thanks also to Tahir Abbas, David Bayley, Robert Beckley, Craig Denholm, Martin Innes and Bob Lambert for their insightful, constructive and supportive comments on various drafts of the Review. Any mistakes or inaccuracies are, of course, the author’s own. Darren Thiel, February 2009 Contents PAGE Executive Summary 1 Introduction 5 Chapter
    [Show full text]
  • Two Cheers for Bargaining Theory Two Cheers for David A
    Two Cheers for Bargaining Theory Two Cheers for David A. Lake Bargaining Theory Assessing Rationalist Explanations of the Iraq War The Iraq War has been one of the most signiªcant events in world politics since the end of the Cold War. One of the ªrst preventive wars in history, it cost trillions of dollars, re- sulted in more than 4,500 U.S. and coalition casualties (to date), caused enor- mous suffering in Iraq, and may have spurred greater anti-Americanism in the Middle East even while reducing potential threats to the United States and its allies. Yet, despite its profound importance, the causes of the war have re- ceived little sustained analysis from scholars of international relations.1 Al- though there have been many descriptions of the lead-up to the war, the ªghting, and the occupation, these largely journalistic accounts explain how but not why the war occurred.2 In this article, I assess a leading academic theory of conºict—the rationalist approach to war or, simply, bargaining theory—as one possible explanation of the Iraq War.3 Bargaining theory is currently the dominant approach in conºict David A. Lake is Jerri-Ann and Gary E. Jacobs Professor of Social Sciences, Distinguished Professor of Political Science, and Associate Dean of Social Sciences at the University of California, San Diego. He is the author, most recently, of Hierarchy in International Relations (Cornell University Press, 2009). The author is indebted to Peter Gourevitch, Stephan Haggard, Miles Kahler, James Long, Rose McDermott, Etel Solingen, and Barbara Walter for helpful discussions on Iraq or comments on this article.
    [Show full text]
  • Jihadists and Nuclear Weapons
    VERSION: Charles P. Blair, “Jihadists and Nuclear Weapons,” in Gary Ackerman and Jeremy Tamsett, eds., Jihadists and Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Growing Threat (New York: Taylor and Francis, 2009), pp. 193-238. c h a p t e r 8 Jihadists and Nuclear Weapons Charles P. Blair CONTENTS Introduction 193 Improvised Nuclear Devices (INDs) 195 Fissile Materials 198 Weapons-Grade Uranium and Plutonium 199 Likely IND Construction 203 External Procurement of Intact Nuclear Weapons 204 State Acquisition of an Intact Nuclear Weapon 204 Nuclear Black Market 212 Incidents of Jihadist Interest in Nuclear Weapons and Weapons-Grade Nuclear Materials 213 Al-Qa‘ida 213 Russia’s Chechen-Led Jihadists 214 Nuclear-Related Threats and Attacks in India and Pakistan 215 Overall Likelihood of Jihadists Obtaining Nuclear Capability 215 Notes 216 Appendix: Toward a Nuclear Weapon: Principles of Nuclear Energy 232 Discovery of Radioactive Materials 232 Divisibility of the Atom 232 Atomic Nucleus 233 Discovery of Neutrons: A Pathway to the Nucleus 233 Fission 234 Chain Reactions 235 Notes 236 INTRODUCTION On December 1, 2001, CIA Director George Tenet made a hastily planned, clandestine trip to Pakistan. Tenet arrived in Islamabad deeply shaken by the news that less than three months earlier—just weeks before the attacks of September 11, 2001—al-Qa‘ida and Taliban leaders had met with two former Pakistani nuclear weapon scientists in a joint quest to acquire nuclear weapons. Captured documents the scientists abandoned as 193 AU6964.indb 193 12/16/08 5:44:39 PM 194 Charles P. Blair they fled Kabul from advancing anti-Taliban forces were evidence, in the minds of top U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Al Qaeda Network a New Framework for Defining the Enemy
    THE AL QAEDA NETWORK A NEW FRAMEWORK FOR DEFINING THE ENEMY KATHERINE ZIMMERMAN SEPTEMBER 2013 THE AL QAEDA NETWORK A NEW FRAMEWORK FOR DEFINING THE ENEMY KATHERINE ZIMMERMAN SEPTEMBER 2013 A REPORT BY AEI’S CRITICAL THREATS PROJECT ABOUT US About the Author Katherine Zimmerman is a senior analyst and the al Qaeda and Associated Movements Team Lead for the Ameri- can Enterprise Institute’s Critical Threats Project. Her work has focused on al Qaeda’s affiliates in the Gulf of Aden region and associated movements in western and northern Africa. She specializes in the Yemen-based group, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and al Qaeda’s affiliate in Somalia, al Shabaab. Zimmerman has testified in front of Congress and briefed Members and congressional staff, as well as members of the defense community. She has written analyses of U.S. national security interests related to the threat from the al Qaeda network for the Weekly Standard, National Review Online, and the Huffington Post, among others. Acknowledgments The ideas presented in this paper have been developed and refined over the course of many conversations with the research teams at the Institute for the Study of War and the American Enterprise Institute’s Critical Threats Project. The valuable insights and understandings of regional groups provided by these teams directly contributed to the final product, and I am very grateful to them for sharing their expertise with me. I would also like to express my deep gratitude to Dr. Kimberly Kagan and Jessica Lewis for dedicating their time to helping refine my intellectual under- standing of networks and to Danielle Pletka, whose full support and effort helped shape the final product.
    [Show full text]
  • Islamic Radicalization in the Uk: Index of Radicalization
    ISLAMIC RADICALIZATION IN THE UK: INDEX OF RADICALIZATION Anna Wojtowicz, (Research Assistant, ICT) Sumer 2012 ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to analyze the process of radicalization amongst British Muslims in the United Kingdom. It begins with a review of the Muslim population, demographics and community structure. Further presenting several internal and external indicators that influenced and led to radicalization of Muslim youth in Britain. The paper concludes that there is no one certainty for what causes radicalization amongst Muslims in United Kingdom. However, it is certain that Islamic radicalization and the emergence of a homegrown threat is a growing trend that jeopardizes the countries security, peace and stability. Radicalization in the United Kingdom is an existing concern that needs to be addressed and acted upon immediately. Misunderstanding or underestimating the threat may lead to further and long term consequences. * The views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT). 2 I. Introduction 4 II. Background 5 History of the Muslim Community in the United Kingdom 5 Population 7 Geographical Concentration of Muslims 8 Ethnic Background 10 Age Estimate 11 Occupation and Socio-Economic Conditions 11 Religious and Cultural Aspects 13 Multiculturalism 17 Islamophobia 20 Converts 21 Case Studies –London, Birmingham, Bradford, Leeds, Leicester 22 III. Organizations 28 Organizations within the United Kingdom 28 Mosques, Koranic Schools and Islamic Centers 34 Student Groups 40 Islamic Websites and TV 43 IV. Radicalization in Britain 43 Theoretical Background and Causes of Radicalization 43 Recruitment and Radicalization: Overlook 47 Radicalization Process 49 Forms of Financing 51 Radical Groups and Movements in the UK 53 Influential Leaders in the UK 60 Inspiration and Influence from Abroad 67 Sunni 67 Shia 70 3 V.
    [Show full text]
  • The Current Detainee Population of Guantánamo: an Empirical Study
    © Reuters/HO Old – Detainees at XRay Camp in Guantanamo. The Current Detainee Population of Guantánamo: An Empirical Study Benjamin Wittes and Zaahira Wyne with Erin Miller, Julia Pilcer, and Georgina Druce December 16, 2008 The Current Detainee Population of Guantánamo: An Empiricial Study Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 3 The Public Record about Guantánamo 4 Demographic Overview 6 Government Allegations 9 Detainee Statements 13 Conclusion 22 Note on Sources and Methods 23 About the Authors 28 Endnotes 29 Appendix I: Detainees at Guantánamo 46 Appendix II: Detainees Not at Guantánamo 66 Appendix III: Sample Habeas Records 89 Sample 1 90 Sample 2 93 Sample 3 96 The Current Detainee Population of Guantánamo: An Empiricial Study EXECUTIVE SUMMARY he following report represents an effort both to document and to describe in as much detail as the public record will permit the current detainee population in American T military custody at the Guantánamo Bay Naval Station in Cuba. Since the military brought the first detainees to Guantánamo in January 2002, the Pentagon has consistently refused to comprehensively identify those it holds. While it has, at various times, released information about individuals who have been detained at Guantánamo, it has always maintained ambiguity about the population of the facility at any given moment, declining even to specify precisely the number of detainees held at the base. We have sought to identify the detainee population using a variety of records, mostly from habeas corpus litigation, and we have sorted the current population into subgroups using both the government’s allegations against detainees and detainee statements about their own affiliations and conduct.
    [Show full text]
  • Unclassified
    UNCLASSIFIED Departmentof Defense 1 Office for the AdministrativeReview of the Detentionof Enemy Combatantsat U.S.NavalBase GuantanamoBay, Cuba 22 August2007 JARABH, SAEEDAHMED MOHAMMEDABDULLAH SAREM Subject: UNCLASSIFIEDSUMMARYOF EVIDENCEFOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWBOARDINTHE CASE JARABH, SAEEDAHMEDMOHAMMED ABDULLAHSAREM 1. AnAdministrativeReviewBoardwill be convenedto reviewyour case to determineifyour continueddetentionis necessary. 2.The Administrative Review Board will conduct a comprehensive review of all reasonably available and relevant information regarding case . At the conclusion of this review the Board will make a recommendation to: ( ) release you to your home state ; ( ) transfer you to your home state, with conditions agreed upon by the United States and your home state ; or (3 ) continue your detention under United States control. 3. The followingprimary factors favor continued detention: a Commitment 1. The detaineewas a Yemenimemberof alQaida. 2. A source stated the detainee was a member of al Qaida and will go back to jihad when he leaves Guantanamo. 3. The detainee stated that in 1992 he re -discovered religion and became interested injoiningthe jihadin Chechnyaor Kashmir. To payfor expenses, the detainee helpedhimselfto the cashbox at hisfather'sjewelrystore. The detaineehad consultedhis fatherregardingjihad and was told no. 4. In May 2002 , the detainee stated he had traveled to Afghanistan twice. The first trip was in late 2000 where he claimed that he worked with three separate Islamic charities. The second trip was in September or August of 2001. 5. The detaineestatedhetraveledto Afghanistanbecauseheintendedto go to the Chechen border to help refugees. 6. The detaineecitedthe Koranandthe possibilityofexpandinghisgoldbusinessas motivationfor travelto Afghanistan. The detaineemadehisown travel DMO Exhibit 1 Page of 4 UNCLASSIFIED 232 UNCLASSIFIED Subject: UNCLASSIFIEDSUMMARYOFEVIDENCEFORADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWBOARDINTHECASEOFJARABH, SAEEDAHMEDMOHAMMED ABDULLAHSAREM arrangements .
    [Show full text]
  • The Emerging Law of Detention the Guantánamo Habeas Cases As Lawmaking*
    January 22, 2010 The Emerging Law of Detention The Guantánamo Habeas Cases as Lawmaking* © Reuters/Pool New – Guantanamo guard stands inside a doorway at Camp 6 dentention facility at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base. by Benjamin Wittes, Robert Chesney & Rabea Benhalim * The authors received substantial assistance on this paper from The Hoover Institution Task Force on National Security and Law, whose members provided helpful comments on a draft manuscript and whose partnership with Brookings on national security law has become invaluable in so many ways. In addition, we benefited from detailed comments from David Remes. Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 4 Historical Context for the Current Habeas Litigation 9 Burden of Proof 13 The Scope of the Government’s Detention Authority 16 Is Detainability, Once Established Permanent? 23 Evidentiary Presumptions 32 The Court’s Treatment of Hearsay Evidence 35 The Admissibility and Weight of Involuntary Statements 51 Mosaic Theory and the Totality of the Evidence 61 Would Difference Judges Have Reached Difference Results? 65 Issues on Appeal 73 Conclusion 81 Appendix I 86 Appendix II 88 The Emerging Law of Detention: The Guantánamo Habeas Cases as Lawmaking EXECUTIVE SUMMARY resident Obama’s decision not to seek additional legislative authority for detentions at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba—combined with Congress’s lack of Pinterest in the task—means that, for good or for ill, judges must write the rules governing military detention of terrorist suspects. As the United States reaches the president’s self-imposed January 22, 2010 deadline for Guantanamo’s closure with the base still holding nearly 200 detainees, the common-law process of litigating their habeas corpus lawsuits has emerged as the chief legislative mechanism for doing so.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Patterns of Terrorism Prevention in the United Kingdom
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Calhoun, Institutional Archive of the Naval Postgraduate School Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Faculty and Researcher Publications Faculty and Researcher Publications 2008-01-00 Recent Patterns of Terrorism Prevention in the United Kingdom Irons, Larry R. Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School Homeland Security Affairs (January 2008), v.4 no.1 http://hdl.handle.net/10945/25108 Recent Patterns of Terrorism Prevention in the United Kingdom Larry R. Irons INTRODUCTION The Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) was the basic internal security threat to the United Kingdom over the past 100 years. In particular, more than 3,600 people died during the “Troubles” (1969-1996). However, authorities no longer consider Irish paramilitary organizations the country’s major terrorist threat.1 The major terrorist challenge to the UK today comes from international terrorist groups affiliated with al Qaeda. Until recently, the nexus of the affiliation with al Qaeda was Pakistan and Afghanistan. Recent attacks suggest a nexus with Iraq as well. However, the emergence of a new threat such as al Qaeda does not mean that intelligence analysts’ thinking, conditioned to meet one threat, e.g. PIRA, adjusts readily to the new threat.2 The analysis here highlights this issue in the recent patterns of terrorism prevention in the UK. Three agencies make up the national intelligence and security services in the UK, The Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) – the nation’s external intelligence agency overseen by the foreign secretary; the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) – which develops signals intelligence, also overseen by the foreign secretary; and the Security Service (MI5), which operates under the authority of the home secretary to conduct surveillance operations.
    [Show full text]