关于"恐怖主义"的定义

关于什么是“恐怖主义”,各国立法有些有多种规定,有些未作规定,学者也是众说纷纭,莫衷一是,国际社会也未能在“恐怖主义”定义方面达成共识。究竟为什么给“恐怖主义”下定义如此不易?是否必须给其下定义呢?又如何给“恐怖主义”下定义?作为反恐法律制定和研究的起点,这些都是反恐理论与实践皆无法回避的问题。     

恐怖主义的根源及其防治对策分析

恐怖主义有其产生的历史因素、政治因素、文化因素和民族、宗教因素。针对恐怖主义活动这一特殊的犯罪活动,对策方面必须体现特殊性:立法上要体现国际合作的精神;要以防为主,防控结合;要建立一套统一协调的管理机制,特别是军警配合机制;要使侦查技术手段与安全检查、安全防范有机结合。     

Transnational Competence in an Emergent Epoch

The article elaborates a framework for understanding the relevance of transnational competence to the dynamics that mark the transformations of our time. Nongovernmental stakeholders interacting through dense civil-society networks that permeate domestic-foreign frontiers bear increasing responsibility for the course of events. Based on linked interests, interorganizational knowledge generation and aggregation, partnerships, and interpersonal/intercultural interactions, they are deeply involved in addressing the many challenges posed by an ever more interdependent world. Transnational competence lubricates transterritorial networks and projects. Here, the authors extend earlier work that posited a worldwide skill revolution both by developing explicit dimensions of transnational competence and by introducing a behavioral component. The new framework provides analytical groundwork for explaining why some people, groups, and networks are more effective than others in forging meaningful transnational solidarities, negotiating and benefiting from the intensifying experience of globalization, and waging successful transnational campaigns. The article also probes how the spread of transnational competence is being facilitated by global migration and transmigration trends. The final section explores the governance implications of expanding transnational competency for the emergent epoch.     

Queer(y)ing Hannah Arendt,or what’s Hannah Arendt got to do with intersectionality?

Abstract

This article takes an unlikely approach to thinking about intersectionality theory. Exploring key concepts from the writings of Hannah Arendt, such as plurality, conscious pariah, and statelessness, alongside her embodied interrogation of anti-Semitism and the Jewish Question, it suggests a way to transgress the ordinary boundaries of the concepts of queer, international, and feminist and, conversely, to unbound the ordinary ways Arendt’s theories have been interpreted as less relevant, if not antithetical to, feminist, intersectional, and queer theories and politics.     

Blurring the line between licit and illicit: transnational corruption networks in Central Asia and beyond

The anti-corruption norm in both scholarship and the policy world has too narrowly focused on the domestic and institutional context of bribe-taking and public corruption. Instead, we argue that corruption in the contemporary global economy requires a multiple set of connected transactions, processes, and relationships that take place within informal transnational networks that blur the line between illegal and legal activities. These networks include multinational companies, elites in host countries, offshore financial vehicles and conduits, middlemen and brokers, and destination financial institutions. We examine how these actors operate in Central Asia, a region that is widely identified as corrupt, yet is rarely understood as embedded in the types of global processes, offshore connections and transnational links specified in our analysis. Examples of offshore centers in tax planning from Central Asia, and partial results from a field experiment based on impersonating high corruption risks from four Central Asian states, provide evidence for how the various actors in transnational financial networks structure their dealings. We then present two brief illustrative cases of how these transnational networks have operated in energy explorations services in Kazakhstan and telecommunications contracts in Uzbekistan. Our findings have theoretical, practical, and normative implications for scholars and practitioners of Central Asian international political economy and other ‘high risk' regions.     

Why me? An autoethnographic account of the bizarre logic of counterterrorism

The core concern of this article is derived from my personal experience of being stopped and questioned at Heathrow Airport on 28 March 2012 for possession of “suspect materials”: academic books on terrorism. I seek to utilise this experience to reflect on how logics of counterterrorism can become manifested in bizarre and prejudicial ways, and how autoethnography provides a unique means to articulate human experiences of such logics. I further utilise my experience to reflect on the dynamics of academic privilege, which often flourish at the expense of the voices of “ordinary citizens”, and argue that autoethnography can be embraced as an empowering form of self-expression through which “ordinary citizens” might de-subjugate themselves from the margins of academia towards an emancipatory ideal wherein the lived experiences of such citizens occupy a substantial space in academic and popular understandings of (counter)terrorism.     

PREVENT: creating “radicals” to strengthen anti-Muslim narratives

“She is of good behaviour and a good Muslim. Against this background, I accept on the evidence before me that this defendant gathered together the contents of the SD card in order to explore and understand the charges which her brothers faced. There is no evidence that she was motivated by their ideology or was preparing to follow them.” The judge in the case of Umm Ahmed clarified to the court that she had not been involved in illegality or had any intention to pose a threat to the UK. Despite this recognition, he sentenced Begum to a 12-month prison term for possessing the magazine Inspire which she had been reading to understand her charged brother’s case. What is unknown is the story of how Umm Ahmed was subjected to a deradicalisation programme, under the auspices of PREVENT and CHANNEL, without any indication of actual involvement in terrorism. The use of deradicalisation narratives in schools, universities and hospitals has led to the criminalisation of large sections of the various Muslim communities in the UK. Based on our experience of cases such as Umm Ahmed, we hope to present a view of how an aggressive anti-Muslim narrative that is based on assumptions subverts the political expression/identity of individuals by turning them into potential threats. The advocacy group CAGE has been working with Umm Ahmed in order to highlight the abuse of the terrorism narrative in her case, but also to understand the actual implementation of PREVENT and CHANNEL beyond their conceptual promotion as a safeguarding tool. By understanding the everyday interactions with PREVENT, a picture can be formed of the way that a false presentation of narratives can lead to a person becoming an “extremist” or “terrorist”, while the truth may lie in a completely alternative place.     

The enfranchisement of citizens abroad: variations and explanations

Today, a large majority of states allow at least some of their emigrants to take part in home country elections from abroad. This article first looks at the diffusion of external voting laws and shows that over the past 25 years they have become widely-adopted and are no longer limited to specific professional categories of citizens. Second, the article explains the international diffusion of external voting by discussing the “norm-internationalization hypothesis” and the “electoral-competition hypothesis.” Third, the article attempts to demonstrate that these hypotheses cannot explain why, in a democratic context, states continue to implement a series of hurdles that deter emigrants from using their newly gained rights. Looking at recent developments in Latin America and the Middle East and North Africa, it concludes that the diffusion and variations of external voting laws result from transnational negotiation processes in a context of democratic transformation among various actors whose interests are strongly affected by the inclusion or exclusion of these new voters.     

Sisters in Terrorism? Exploding Stereotypes

New Terrorism is increasingly deploying women in the field as combatants. Female suicide bombers have proven to be highly effective, precisely because of the persistence of gender stereotypes in target societies. Women terrorists convey a powerful message of political seriousness, heighten the sense of intimidation and threat, and attract greater mass media attention—all key strategic objectives of New Terrorism. Gender stereotypes are also at work in explanations for women's recourse to terrorist activism. Such stereotypes simplify complex motivations and either overvalue or undervalue women's agency. The net result of this stereotyping is that women end up worse off individually and collectively, domestically and internationally. The lives of women in geopolitical hotspots have become more precarious, and the valorization of women terrorists undermines the quest for women's emancipation in fundamentalist cultures. In Western democracies, paternalistic outrage at women's subordination under fundamentalist regimes may have initially served as a dubious justification for military and other interventions, but the involvement of women in terrorist activism now risks reinforcing an even more dangerous “clash of civilizations” thinking. One effect is to undermine the demands for greater gender equality in Western democracies as well as indirectly support the war on women political agenda domestically.