Terror

Document Sample
Terror Powered By Docstoc
					TACKLING TERRORISM

   A talk-through exercise
     WHAT CAN BE DONE?
• Not to ‘eliminate’ terrorism or defeat it in a
  ‘war’- it can be cut back/phased out here or
  there, but never eliminated from the human
  mind or the toolbox of violence
• But to reduce and ‘contain’ it, discourage as
  many as possible from doing + supporting it,
  and avoid/ minimize/quickly repair the
  damage to ourselves
  SIX BASIC APPROACHES
• Physically stop them (catch, kill)
• Outlaw and criminalize them
• ‘Starve’ them by cutting off money,
  equipment, info, free movement etc etc
• Make them change their minds and methods
• Persuade others not to support them
• ‘Harden’ + protect ourselves as a target,
  improve resilience
     FOR EACH METHOD:
• When and how could it be done?
• With what measures and tools?
• Who has to help - national or
  international, state +non-state actors?
• Are any international institutions useful?
• LET’S TALK THROUGH…..
    PHYSICAL COERCION (Kill, catch,
       disarm, pre-empt/prevent)
•   Only works in specific circs. when you have a physical target – you
    know that they are terrorists and where they are
•   Extreme option if terrorists cannot be changed/blocked any other way
•   More legitimate versions: block an imminent attack, use regular
    (proportionate) military force against clear target (large-scale military
    action never precise enough; methods like assassination and some
    long-distance strikes illegal)
•   Typically a method for one state (and perhaps its close allies); multi-
    state institutions v unlikely to agree (even if this option is within NATO
    and ESDP doctrine!)
•   Or action by a part of a state/state proxy, eg a sub-state vigilante group
    using perhaps equally terroristic methods (vicious circle)
     METHODS OF LAW AND
          JUSTICE
• Can be used against multiple, scattered and even unknown
  targets; weeds out the terrorists from the lawful majority (and
  from criminal killers, etc)
• Tools: legal definition of terrorism and penalties, intelligence,
  police, courts – but can they actually reach the terrorists, is
  enforcement effective and lasting?
• Relies on national enforcement, but wide international action v
  desirable to catch mobile/networked terrorists: example = EU
  actions in 2001 and 2004; not yet fully working at UN level
  because no single global definition, no international court where
  terrorism as such is an offence
    CUTTING OFF SUPPLIES AND
   ACCESS (‘TURN OFF THE TAP’)
• Also good when you don’t know ‘who is out there’ but you know
  what they need in order to operate
• Cut off: money flows and cash deposits (legal or illegal)
  weapons, explosives, MANPADS, WMD, WMD-related
  knowhow; also access to international travel, passports/visas
• International cooperation essential and as wide as possible:
  some UN measures (moneylaundering, WMD), large ‘export
  control groups’, multiple EU measures
• Relies very much on help of non-state business actors
• Always loopholes if measures not truly universal; v hard to stop
  huge loophole of the Internet
• But measures not too costly or risky, and hamper other badguys
     CHANGE THEIR MINDS
• Works if terrorists have a clear political goal which is
  (to some degree) achievable, and the concessions
  needed are a fair price for stopping/reducing terrorist
  violence
• Typical methods of ‘peace settlement’: mediation,
  negotiation using political/economic/social ‘carrots’,
  independence or autonomy deals, handled within
  state or with international or NGO help
• But who do you bring into the settlement and who
  leave out? – splinter, ‘spoiler’ groups v likely; or
  settlement could unravel
        CHANGE THEIR
      SUPPORTERS’ MINDS
• Relevant where terrorists are basing themselves on
  wider popular grievances and public are
  harbouring/tolerating/supporting them
• Method can be offering carrots to terrorist leaders or
  direct to the people: economic/social changes and
  general democratization most useful in latter case.
• Generally done within a state but can use
  international/institutional funds and skills. Success in
  winning over non-state groups and actors vital for
  success, pro-peace NGO/civil groups can help
   ‘HARDEN’ THE TARGETS
• Always relevant, but most efficient if you know bits where
  terrorists are most likely to strike and/or which are most
  vulnerable (eg transport systems, VIPs)
• Physical protection, access control; conceal or multiply key
  facilities; efficient emergency response, fast recovery
• International action v relevant for protecting transnational
  systems: transport + travel, energy assets, communications +
  Internet etc; can pursue cooperation in UN, EU, specialized
  instititutions; NB EU ‘solidarity clause’ on post-strike aid
• Very dependent on business, society + individuals to be safety-
  conscious and calm; volunteer rescue + humanitarian groups
       SO WHICH ARE THE MOST
      IMPORTANT INTERNATIONAL
           INSTITUTIONS?
• Generally: Institutions with power to make laws and
  regulations; to set standards for and coordinate
  national action; to pool and apply resources; to
  maintain respect and legitimacy (eg for negotiating
  with terrorists or converting their supporters)
• UN, EU, specialist (eg transport regulating) bodies,
  export control groups, aid and humanitarian agencies
• Collective military groups (NATO, SCO) have
  narrower relevant competences and are less likely to
  agree on collective (military) action

				
DOCUMENT INFO