The terror experts and the mainstream media: the expert nexus and its dominance in the news media

Academic writing on ‘terrorism’ and the availability to the mainstream media and policy-makers of terror ‘experts’ have increased exponentially since 11 September 2001. This paper examines the rise of terror expertise and its use in one particular public arena – the mainstream news media. Using a combination of citation analysis and media analysis, the paper presents a ranking of the most influential terror experts in the mainstream news media in the Anglophone world. It is shown how what has been called an ‘invisible college’ of experts operates as a nexus of interests connecting academia with military, intelligence and government agencies, with the security industry and the media. The paper then takes a small number of case studies of some of the most prominent experts who exemplify the dominant trend in the field and examines the networks in which they are embedded. The last part of the paper uses the data generated to re-examine theories of ‘terrorism’ and the media, of ‘propaganda’ and ‘terrorism’, and of ‘source–media’ relations. It is suggested that the study of terror experts shows the need to study and theorise the media in a wider context by focusing on the relations between media content and production processes and wider formations of power. In so doing, the paper attempts to connect studies of media and terrorism to wider studies of terror and political violence.     

FRAMEWORKS FOR CONCEPTUALISING TERRORISM

Terrorism has been situated—and thereby implicitly also defined—in various contexts such as crime, politics, war, propaganda and religion. Depending on which framework one chooses, certain aspects of terrorism get exposed while others are placed ‘outside the picture’ if only one framework is utilised. In this article five conceptual lenses are utilised: 1. terrorism as/and crime; 2. terrorism as/and politics; 3. terrorism as/and warfare; 4. terrorism as/and communication; and 5. terrorism as/and religious fundamentalism.     

Bermuda triangle: comparing official definitions of terrorist activity

Terror has been officially defined by many states and international actors. Although these definitions differ from each other to a certain extent, the basic divergence appears in the definition of the terrorist, since it reveals who is considered an ‘enemy’ by those actors. The difference between the definitions and lists elaborated by the United States and by the European Union on ‘terrorism, terrorist, and terror organization’ indicates their respective perceptions of the enemy as well as their differing global policies on terrorism. In Turkey, a country marked by a 20 year long struggle against terrorism, the definition of these concepts is mostly limited to domestic politics. The objective of this paper is to compare and contrast the official definitions of terror, terrorist, and terrorist organization by these three actors, including their respective international positions on terrorism.     

Does terrorism create terror?

The conceptual and etymological meaning of the terms ‘terror’ and ‘terrorism’ is so closely connected that it seems difficult to distinguish the one from the other. However, by comparing the idea that terrorism inevitably creates terror with the results of recent empirical studies of the psychological effects of terrorist attacks, four different points of view emerge corresponding to four distinct interpretations of the results. It is thus clearly necessary to redefine the terminology relating to terrorism, in order to conduct the discussion on a more rigorous basis.     

The literal truth about terrorism: an analysis of post-9/11 popular US non-fiction books on terrorism

More books with the word ‘terrorism’ in the title have been published in the twenty-first century than the combined total of all such books prior to that. Over half of these were on the subject of ‘Islamic terrorism’. The sheer volume of such texts, without even taking into consideration their contents, contributed to rendering as ‘true’, the existence of the phenomenon they publicised. Such an increase in the literature on the subject of Islamic terrorism was made possible by an overall relaxation of usually strict enunciative rules and regulations governing discursive production. This article explores the effects of the loosening of the latter controls through an analysis of popular non-fiction books published on the subject of terrorism in the United States in the early years of the ‘war on terror’ and the authors of these books, as the existence of these texts – never mind their influence – has been ignored by terrorism scholars to date.     

Right‐wing terrorism in a comparative perspective: The case of split delegitimization

The purpose of this article is to identify the distinctive features of right‐wing terrorism and to develop an analytical typology of particularistic terrorist organizations. The article is based on the conceptual framework of the process of delegitimization developed earlier by this author. It argues that right‐wing radicals usually reach terrorism through a trajectory of split delegitimization, which implies a primary conflict with an ‘inferior’ community and a secondary conflict with the government. Six sub‐types of right‐wing terrorism are identified: revolutionary terrorism, reactive terrorism, vigilante terrorism, racist terrorism, millenarian terrorism and youth counterculture terrorism.     

Southeast Asia and the global ‘war on terror’ discourse

This study explores global and regional war on terror discourses. It focuses upon language construction ‘framing’ the character of, and global and regional responses to, terrorism. It is concerned with social power and critiques the war on terror discourse globally and in Southeast Asia. Central to this are constructions of Islam. The analysis assesses the complexities behind often essentialized depictions of Islam. The paper argues that a deeper understanding of the complexities of the discursive dimension of the war on terror can help provide an additional understanding of the ideational background for operational counterterrorism policies and practices.     

A history of drones: moral(e) bombing and state terrorism

This article argues that an historical investigation of air power makes possible the critique of current regimes of drone surveillance and bombing as a practice of state terrorism. By identifying certain key themes regularly used in terrorism studies for the classification of violence as “terrorism”, this article shows that early air power theorists understood military aircraft as essentially instruments of terrorism. A central argument permeating these theorists’ conception of air power was that the military value of aviation lay in its capacity to target the enemy’s population and, by means of bombing, generate a significant “moral effect” – that is, a psychological effect against the morale of civilians. This strategic formula constituted a central component of British air control schemes during the interwar period, where terror bombing was deployed systematically in order to control and pacify colonial populations. In arguing that widespread and long-lasting terror remains an inalienable feature of air power, this article concludes with a call for a critique that accounts for the fact that current deployments of armed drones – for instance, the US “targeted killings” programme – effectively reproduce these historical and material conditions of terrorist violence.     

Developing a critical pedagogy of ‘research-based’ teaching in Islamic studies

Studying Islam and Middle Eastern politics has become highly popular, particularly in American and British universities after the 9/11 and 7/7 terrorist events. Unfortunately, the increasing interest in Islam and Muslims in the West is often based on (mis)recognition of images of Muslims in the media. This has created a new set of problems of ignorance and misunderstandings about terrorism and the Islamic world. The intent of this article is to outline a ‘critical pedagogy’ of research-based teaching for Islamic studies and illustrate how this kind of pedagogical engagement better equips students to ‘problematise the natural, cultural and historical reality’ and dominant Orientalist assumptions about the relationship between Islam and terrorism. This article shows how research-based teaching can help students to become critical thinkers to connect knowledge and power while studying Islam and Middle Eastern politics.     

The US discourse on political Islam: is Obama's a truly post-‘war on terror’ administration?

In this article, I examine the legacy of the discourse on political Islam in the context of George W. Bush's ‘war on terror’, reflecting on the role this discourse has performed in constructing and affirming the United States' self-identity as a beacon of ‘democracy’, ‘progress’ and ‘modernity’, in contradistinction to an Islamist ‘other’. It will evaluate the three most prominent manifestations of the modern rationalist paradigm in relation to the ‘war on terror’ discourse: the tendency to ‘ideologise terror’; the tendency to conflate Islamist movements and view them solely within a security/counterterrorism framework; and the tendency to employ double standards when distinguishing between what is regarded as legitimate and illegitimate uses of political violence. This article will then consider to what extent it is appropriate to label the period since the Obama election as a truly ‘post-war on terror’ politics.     

Beyond necessity: Hezbollah and the intersection of state-sponsored terrorism with organised crime

ABSTRACT

The world is arguably experiencing a resurgence of state-sponsored terrorism. Meanwhile, the crime-terror nexus is seen as a continued threat to global security and stability. However, there has been little attention paid to the use of organised crime by state-sponsored terror groups. This is because existing literature views the use of criminal fundraising as an alternative to state-sponsorship. Despite this, there are numerous examples of state-sponsored organisations which nevertheless engage in organised crime. This paper addresses this puzzle by comparing two competing theoretical approaches on the crime-terror nexus. Current literature tends to either focus on responses to economic necessity at the group level or on the broader structure of opportunities and constraints. A congruence analysis will be conducted using the case of Hezbollah to test these approaches to the specific issue of state-sponsorship and crime. The main finding is that approaches rooted in opportunity structures have significantly more explanatory power than those focused on group level motivation and necessity. This paper also finds a more complex role for state-sponsors with some states actively enabling crime. This suggests the need for an understanding of terror and crime which focuses on the internationalised political context as well as internal group dynamics.     

On the victims of terrorism and their innocence

Contrary to common usage, neither ‘victims’ nor their ‘innocence’ are necessary to the definition of the term ‘terrorism’. Though the primary targets ‐ as distinguished from audiences ‐ of most terrorist actions are people, and if the aim of the terrorists is to sow unreasoning fear, then symbolically important non‐human targets such as unmanned power sources, unoccupied government buildings and the like may serve the same purpose. Moreover, given that ‘victims’ are chosen for the shock value their death or injury may have, their ‘innocence’ (or even ‘guilt') may be incidental or even irrelevant to the violence visited upon them. A definition of ‘terrorism’ that focuses, generically, on its targets rather than on their qualities offers a more normatively neutral approach to the problem.     

The EU's approach post-September 11: global terrorism as a multidimensional law enforcement challenge

In response to the threat of terrorism following 9/11, the European Union has opted for a clear cross-border law enforcement approach that is quite distinct from the putative ‘war on terror’. This choice has been determined by factors of history, divergent threat perceptions, relative value orientations and restricted competences. And yet, far from limiting itself to a traditional ‘internal’ law enforcement focus, the EU has developed an extensive multidimensional approach that combines legislative and operational, repressive and preventive, internal and external, as well as institutional, measures. But weaknesses persist: the preference given by member states to instruments of cooperation and coordination, rather than integration, as well as the poor implementation of many agreed-upon measures, negatively weigh against the effectiveness of the EU's multidimensional law enforcement approach. Legitimacy deficits also exist owing to limited parliamentary and judicial control. These deficits will need to be addressed to reinforce the credibility of the EU's approach as a viable ‘European’ alternative to the US ‘war on terror’.     

European and Asian responses to the US-led ‘war on terror’

This article seeks to establish a context for the other contributions to this special issue. Using the lens of strategic culture, the article tries to explore how states from Europe and Asia have responded to the US-led ‘war on terror’. It argues that the nature of the threat from international terrorism requires states in Europe and Asia to develop a range of external and internal policy responses. Europe has been able to react to this changing strategic environment more successfully because of the pre-existing pattern of interstate cooperation as well as the organizational framework of the European Union. The United States has been more successful in imposing its counterterrorism priorities upon particular Asian states due to the absence of mature frameworks for international cooperation within the region.     

Just counterterrorism

This article proposes the Just Counterterrorism Model for shaping and assessing counterterrorism strategy and tactics that are comprehensive, effective and ethical. After deconflating non-state terrorism from other sources of terror and briefly surveying how terror groups end, the article develops the Just Counterterrorism Model’s three components of Justice for the Attacked, Justice for Terrorists and Justice for Others. Each component addresses one of the three sets of actors involved in non-state terrorism (comprehensive), incorporates lessons learned from surveying how terror groups end (effective) and is informed by Rawls’ ethic of justice as fairness (ethical).     

Sam Fisher and the “war on terror”: an analysis of Splinter Cell in a post-9/11 context

This article examines the values and attitudes present within the 2002 video game Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell, and the methods employed to convey them. It compares the game’s message with the rhetoric contained in the Bush administration’s post-9/11 “war on terror” narrative. A qualitative content analysis of a Splinter Cell “game movie” and gameplay sessions is undertaken to examine the messages communicated through elements of simulation and representation. This article finds that Splinter Cell and the “war on terror” narrative express similar perspectives of terrorism and counterterrorism. First, both exaggerate the physical and normative threat of terrorism, and portray it as overwhelmingly powerful. Second, both sources justify violent counterterrorism action through claims of necessity, urgency and self-defence. Third, violence is consistently portrayed as effective for achieving the desired objective. Finally, violence and military action are represented as simple solutions that ultimately lead to victory over terrorism. The parallels between the messages within Splinter Cell and the “war on terror” rhetoric indicate that the game was shaped by the post-9/11 culture in which it was developed. More significantly, however, Splinter Cell perpetuates and legitimises the “war on terror” narrative by conveying its message through an immersive interactive environment.     

What's so ‘religious’ about ‘religious terrorism’?

This article assesses the validity of the concept of ‘religious terrorism’ and its consequences for research and policy practices. It explores the origins, assumptions and primary arguments of the term and subjects them to an analytical assessment. It argues that the distinctions typically drawn between ‘religious’ and ‘secular’ terrorism are problematic, both conceptually and empirically, and that the term is misleading in its typical assumptions about the motives, causes and behaviour of groups classified as ‘religious terrorist’. In particular, it shows that the behaviour of those thus labelled is so diverse, and often so indistinguishable from their ‘secular’ counterparts, that the term has little meaning without further qualification, while simultaneously obscuring important aspects of both ‘religious’ and ‘secular’ violence. It then goes on to illustrate how the term, rooted in a particular historically situated understanding of religion and a particular set of power structures, serves as a disciplinary device to domesticate ‘political religion’, delegitimising certain actors while legitimising a number of highly contentious counterterrorist practices designed to deal with those described as ‘religious terrorists’. The article ends with some suggestions for alternative ways to study the role of beliefs and institutional structures, religious or otherwise, in producing political violence.     

Surveillance to Combat Terrorist Financing in Europe: Whose Liberty,Whose Security?

Abstract

This article analyses recent developments in the campaign to combat terrorist financing in Europe and questions the utility of financial surveillance as a method to counter terrorism. A background presentation of surveillance in modern society is followed by an overview of earlier international initiatives to interdict money laundering. The measures used to combat terrorist finance are built upon this foundation of surveillance and criminal investigation. Applying these measures in the ‘war on terror’ has unintended consequences for the financial transactions of citizens and non-citizens alike. The article concludes by considering these problems and their impact on society within the context of a larger concern for the impact to individual liberty from these surveillance practices in pursuit of security in the early twenty-first century.     

State terrorism? Applying a definitional model

This article has a dual purpose. The first is to propose a model by which acts of state violence may be adjudged to be state terrorism. The second is to apply empirical evidence to the theoretical model in order to highlight some of the obstacles in constructing an indictment of terrorism against a state. It represents an attempt to provide a test of a theoretical model that I have been developing as part of a programme of research into the use of terrorism by states, employing a number of historical case studies representing different types of repressive activity. Using comparative methods I aim to understand the policy‐making process that leads to the use of terror and establish whether there are patterns in the application of terror under particular circumstances.     

Not quite the ‘Great Britain of the Far East’: Japan's security,the US–Japan alliance and the ‘war on terror’ in East Asia

Japan, in responding to US expectations for support in the ‘war on terror’, has displayed a degree of strategic convergence on global security objectives, thus prompting policy-makers and observers to dub it the ‘Great Britain of the Far East’. This article argues, however, that Japan is far from assuming this role. For Japan, the ‘war on terror’ serves more as a political pretext for legitimating long-planned changes in military security policy that are often only marginally related to the US's anti-terrorism agenda. Instead, Japan has focused much more on using the terror threat rationale as a means to push forward its response to the regional and traditional security challenges of North Korea and China, even if at times it attempts to depict both as ‘new security challenges’ or as involving elements of counterterrorism. The final conclusion is that US military hegemony may be weakened by Japan's and the Asia-Pacific's potential divergence from the US global security agenda.