Modern Politics in an Age of Global Terrorism: New Challenges for Domestic Public Policy

Much has been written about the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001 and their ramifications for international politics. This article contends that, nearly five years on, the type of terrorism which emerged that day has not only altered the way liberal democracies define and execute their foreign and defence policies, but that it has also affected their ability to attend to policy objectives domestically. Global terrorism, and the governmental policy responses to it, are not subjected to the same reciprocal balance checks that tend to limit the ferocity and lethality of domestic terrorist conflicts. Consequently, as policy-makers attempt to find responses appropriate to contain the new global threat, four values that democratic societies have come to uphold over the past two centuries are increasingly challenged: security, liberty, equality and efficiency have become fundamental principles that guide the formation of domestic public policy and constitute the criteria by which policy success is judged. Yet, our account of the political developments in the United Kingdom and the United States reveals that aspiring to those values is meeting unprecedented constraints.     

Utilitarian Multilateralism: The Implications of 11 September 2001 for US Foreign Policy

The 11 September terrorist attacks have led the United States to reassess its foreign policy. The overwhelming priority is the defeat of terrorism and to further this end the United States is prepared to engage with states, regardless of their democratic credentials, willing and able to help the United States on the terrorist front. There is little sign, however, that the new-found interest in promoting multilateral co-operation to deal with terrorism is spilling over into other policy areas. The United States shows no sign of modifying its opposition to a number of international treaties and agreements – such as Kyoto, CTBT or the ICC – all of which its closest allies support. The US approach may be described as 'utilitarian multilateralism'.     

The illicit drug trade, counternarcotics strategies and terrorism

Conventional wisdom indicates that international trade in illicit drugs helps to fuel terrorism. Since 2001, counter-narcotics policy increasingly has been used to fight terrorism. This study investigates empirically the relationship between the drug trade and terrorism and examines whether or not interdiction and eradication efforts reduce domestic and transnational terrorist activity. The study finds that illicit drug production and opiate and cocaine wholesale prices are significant positive predictors of transnational and domestic terrorist attacks, while drug crop eradication and drug interdiction are significant negative predictors of terrorism. The study concludes with the policy implications of the findings.     

Government Responses to Terrorism: Critical Views of Their Impacts on People and Public Administration

Following the tragic, massive terrorist attacks on the United States in September 2001, many antiterrorist laws, policies, and institutions have emerged to wage war on terrorism. These antiterrorist initiatives have major consequences for individuals, societies, and nations all over the world. Although controversies have proliferated with regard to the implications of counterterrorism for people's basic rights, the debate remains fragmented and often unfocused. This article examines the critical impact of new antiterrorist initiatives on the fundamental rights and responsibilities of citizens and others, with special reference to public administration.     

The convergence of nonequity housing models in Canada: Changes to housing policy since 1990

Abstract

This study examines the impact of housing policy convergence on the nonequity housing system in Ontario, Canada. Ontario has four distinct nonequity housing models— public, nonprofit cooperative, municipal nonprofit, and private nonprofit. This article argues that since 1990, housing policy in Canada, and particularly in Ontario, has become increasingly influenced by the neoconservative agenda of downsizing and decentralization of government functions found in the United States.

The findings reveal that changes to housing policy have caused the convergence of nonequity housing models in the areas of management and administration. Drawing on the present findings and on an experimental project in tenant management, this article argues that the trend toward convergence will continue and will likely result in one nonequity housing model in Canada. This pattern is interpreted in light of the neoconservative agenda of both countries that emphasizes private sector solutions to housing low‐income families.     

United States Public Response to Terrorism: Fault Lines or Bedrock?1

We test traditional assumptions about the volatility of mass opinion in times of national crises using data about views of terrorism from national surveys of the United States general public in 1995 and 1997, findings from a national survey immediately following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), and panel data from a follow‐up survey in 2002. We compare public assessments of the threat of terrorism, willingness to restrict speech to prevent terrorism, support for employing conventional military force against countries that support terrorism, and levels of certainty about culpability required prior to using military force. Results show stable and measured public views prior to 9/11, immediately following the events of that date, and in the subsequent year. Our findings support democratic and modernist theories of public capacities while challenging long‐standing traditional precepts about widespread volatility of mass public opinion.     

Terrorist threats in Europe: hype or reality?

On 3 October, the American and British governments issued travel advisories on the threat of terrorist attacks in France and Germany. The United States government characterised the threat as ‘high’, while the United Kingdom raised the terrorist threat level for France and Germany from ‘general’ to ‘high’. Shortly afterwards, the French government issued a warning to its citizens about the risk of a terrorist attack in Britain. Within the UK itself, the threat level in respect of Islamist jihadist terrorism has been set since January 2010 at ‘severe’, the second highest level, indicating an attack is likely but not yet judged imminent. This has remained unchanged.     

How migration policies moderate the diffusion of terrorism

There is an ongoing debate among practitioners and scholars about the security consequences of transnational migration. Yet, existing work has not, so far, fully taken into account the policy instruments states have at their disposal to mitigate these risks, and reliable evidence is lacking for the effectiveness of such measures. This article addresses both shortcomings as whether and to what extent national migration policies affect the diffusion of terrorism via population movements are analysed. Spatial analyses report robust support for a moderating influence of states’ policies: while terrorism can travel from one country to another via larger migration populations, this only applies to target countries with extremely lax regulations and control mechanisms. This research sheds new light on the security implications of population movements, and it crucially adds to our understanding of governments’ instruments for addressing migration challenges as well as their effectiveness.     

INTEGRATING THE POLICY MODELS OF TERRORISM AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

International and domestic terrorism present some of the same kinds of policy imperatives as do natural and other man-made disasters. In terms of the unpredictability and potential destructiveness of the events, the problems of preparing for, mitigating or lessening the effects of, responding to, and recovering from the disasters are essentially the same. This article suggests that the current emergency management models can be adapted to fit the circumstances created by terrorist violence. A model of antiterrorism policy interventions can be f i t into the preparedness, mitigation, response and recovery model now guiding the efforts of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other disaster preparedness and response agencies in the United States.     

Border Security Technologies: Local and Regional Implications

The Bush administration's “Smart Border” accords with Mexico and Canada present a number of important implications for North America's border communities and regions. As part of the plans, new security technologies have emerged as the preferred policy solution to the difficult problem of screening for weapons and terrorist incursions into the United States through its international boundaries while maintaining flows of goods and individuals, key drivers of globalization and hallmarks of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) era. These new technological systems have various capabilities, ranging from prescreening cargo to identifying problematic travelers to detecting nuclear material in trucks. Deploying these systems in border communities, however, invokes a range of important economic, social, and political challenges, all of which are under examination in this work. Using a risk‐centered approach to United States border security, this article explores several technologically oriented border control systems: screening, biometrics, and information technology. The research is based on regional field research and a public policy analysis method that uses Birkland's “focusing event” framework, a model that provides insights into the postcrisis policy formation process. The article concludes by offering an initial appraisal of these policies within the context of risk, interdependent border communities, and an open democratic society.     

Catastrophe risk,insurance and terrorism

This article empirically investigates how the terrorist activity of September 11, 2001, was addressed by the insurance industry and government in the United States. It shows that the insurance system worked reasonably well in compensating losses suffered, albeit with various tribulations. It also demonstrates that the insurance industry, along with government as the ultimate risk manager, imaginatively reconfigured markets to continue terrorism insurance coverage in many contexts. The findings challenge many of Ulrich Beck’s contentions about catastrophe risks and insurability. At the same time, they indicate the fragility of the insurance system. Insurers’ perceptions and decisions about uncertainty – with potential for windfall profits as well as catastrophic losses – create crises in insurance availability and promote new forms of inequality and exclusion. Hence, while the insurance industry is a central bulwark against uncertainty, insurers can also play a key role in fostering it.     

Preferences,Knowledge, and Citizen Probability Assessments of the Terrorism Risk of Nuclear Power

How does the American public assess risk when it comes to national security issues? This paper addresses this question by analyzing variation in citizen probability assessments of the terrorism risk of nuclear power plants. Drawing on the literature on how motivated reasoning, selective information processing, and domain‐specific knowledge influence public opinion, we argue that heterogeneous issue preferences and knowledge of nuclear energy and homeland security have important explanatory power. Using original data from a unique 2009 national survey in the United States, we show that Americans are divided in their probability assessments of the terrorism risk of nuclear power plants. Consistent with our theoretical expectations, individuals who support using nuclear power to meet rising energy demands, who are generally less concerned with terrorism, or who are more knowledgeable about terrorism and nuclear security tend to provide lower assessments of the likelihood that nuclear power plants increase terrorist attacks, and vice versa. The findings have implications for the literature on public opinion, risk assessment, energy policy and planning, and homeland security.     

Can Terrorism Abroad Influence Migration Attitudes at Home?

This article demonstrates that public opinion on migration “at home” is systematically driven by terrorism in other countries. Although there is little substantive evidence linking refugees or migrants to most recent terror attacks in Europe, news about terrorist attacks can trigger more negative views of immigrants. However, the spatial dynamics of this process are neglected in existing research. We argue that feelings of imminent danger and a more salient perception of migration threats do not stop at national borders. The empirical results based on spatial econometrics and data on all terrorist attacks in Europe for the post-9/11 period support these claims. The effect of terrorism on migration concern is strongly present within a country but also diffuses across states in Europe. This finding improves our understanding of public opinion on migration, as well as the spillover effects of terrorism, and it highlights crucial lessons for scholars interested in the security implications of population movements.     

How Terrorism Does (and Does Not) Affect Citizens’ Political Attitudes: A Meta-Analysis

How does terrorism affect citizens’ political attitudes? Over the years, many scholars have tried to answer this question. This article performs a meta-analysis on this literature, reviewing about 325 studies conducted between 1985 and 2020 on more than 400,000 respondents. The findings confirm that terrorism is associated—to a small but significant extent—with outgroup hostility, political conservatism and rally-‘round-the-flag effects. At the same time, the effects of terrorism vary widely, with studies on Islamist violence, conducted in the United States or Israel, and using cross-sectional data yielding stronger results on average. Finally, the review reveals remaining gaps in this field of study, including a lack of research on non-Islamist violence or conducted in non-Western contexts. Taken together, this meta-analysis consolidates existing evidence, determines which results hold across contexts, and identifies key gaps in our current knowledge. Its data can also be accessed interactively via a Shiny App .     

Terrorism, democratization, and US foreign policy

Members of the American foreign policy establishment argue that the United States should combat transnational terrorism by encouraging democratization. Yet, empirical studies indicate that democratization may increase political violence, thereby raising the question: why would American policymakers favor democratization when the empirical record shows that this course of action is so dangerous? This study develops a game theoretic model to analyze the effect of democratization on terrorism. The model demonstrates that the United States uses the commitment problems created by democratization to solve the moral hazard problem created by supporting autocratic hosts. These empirical implications are tested using a combination of two datasets.     

In Extremis: a Self‐defeating Element in the ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ Strategy

The main policy reaction to the terrorist attacks of 7/7 and 21/7 of 2005 has been the development of the £6 million ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ (PVE) initiative which aims, as part of the government's broader counter‐terrorism strategy (CONTEST), to tackle support for, and the promotion of, violent Islamist ideologies within British society. One crucial component of this strategy is providing support for Muslim groups and individuals to tackle radicalisation and extremism directly at the local level. Funding and charitable status for mosques, Muslim community and youth groups and initiatives, ‘forums against extremism’, anti‐extremism ‘road shows’, and the training of imams are included as part of this strategy. This article argues that this aspect of PVE is not only ill‐advised, but potentially deeply counter‐productive. It takes issue with two reasons that inform the PVE strategy: first, that what motivates individuals to join extremist groups are the religious ideas themselves; second, that government intervention or involvement is an effective method for rendering the moderate antidote attractive. Arguably, neither of these assumptions is warranted in the face of contrary evidence. Consequently, this arm of PVE is, at best, barking up the wrong tree; at worst, fuelling extremism.     

Integration of Environmental Concerns in a Trans‐Atlantic Perspective: The Case of Renewable Electricity

The issue of integrating environmental concerns into energy policy decision making is increasingly addressed, not least related to climate change. Although the United States, unlike the EU, did not sign the Kyoto Protocol, several U.S. states promote renewable electricity (RES‐E), and some of these initiatives are linked to climate‐change mitigation efforts. The present article assesses in this connection the six New England states of the United States, comparing their efforts of integrating RES‐E with climate change to the Nordic countries in Europe. In order to explain different approaches, the article focuses on the importance of different EU and U.S. multilevel governing structures. The analysis indicates that the New England states' RES‐E promotion thus far has not been substantially integrated with climate‐change concerns, whereas in the EU's more top‐down approach, climate change figures more prominently vis‐à‐vis RES‐E. EU policies represent an increasingly important driver for the Nordic countries. In the United States, on the other hand, it remains an open question as to how future federal policy efforts will relate to existing policies at the state level.     

Editorial

Today the United States faces an unpredictable security environment characterized by regional powers and non-state actors, such as vast terrorist networks, who wield increasingly lethal weapons. To address this security environment, the George W. Bush administration has endorsed the ‘transformation’ of US military forces. This article focuses on one transformational goal, namely the development of long-range precision strike capabilities, and examines the feasibility and desirability of using existing ballistic missiles as conventional global strike assets. While some of the futuristic and stealthy long-range technologies currently touted by defense planners might fulfill their promise and could someday be deployed, conventional ballistic missiles could offer an efficient global strike capability much sooner, one that would complement other existing global strike capabilities as research and development on more futuristic platforms continues. Thus, by combining existing capabilities, advanced technologies and new, flexible concepts of operations, the United States can deliver tomorrow's capability today.     

Terrorism and affinity of nations

Public Choice - This article investigates whether a country’s political proximity to the United States, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom exposes the country to terrorist attacks. We...     

All Glory is Fleeting: Sigint and the Fight Against International Terrorism

This article discusses the important role that Signals Intelligence (Sigint) has played, and continues to play, in the war against international terrorism. It sets out what is known or can be authoritatively established about the role that Sigint played in the events leading up to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, especially the performance of America's Sigint organization, the National Security Agency (NSA). The article also analyzes what the potential future role of Sigint may be in the war on terrorism given the ever changing nature of terrorist operations, the growing number of technological impediments to effective Sigint collection against terrorist targets, and shifting geostrategic considerations on the part of the nations engaged in the fight against the international terrorists.