Sanctions and public opinion: The case of the Russia-Ukraine gas disputes

The Review of International Organizations - Economic sanctions usually fail, sometimes even provoking the opposite of the intended outcome. Why are sanctions so often ineffective? One prominent...     

Terrorism,violence against the public,and the media: The Australian approach

This paper examines the balance between the apparently competing objectives of government and the media in the general area of violence against the public and details the Australian model for handling issues associated with terrorism and the media. Australia's counterterrorism strategy may be considered holistic, going beyond the idea of a comprehensive capability for response to an actual public incident to include preventive measures and enhancement of the national security environment, suggesting that all elements of the society, including the media, regard security as a cooperative endeavor. These elements have been developed in the “National Anti‐Terrorist Plan” (NATP), developed by Australia's Standing Advisory Committee on Commonwealth/State Cooperation for Prevention against Violence (SAC‐PAV). For the past several years, the SAC‐PAV has been developing a basic strategic guide to provide structure for its many activities, and the committee has agreed that the NATP requires a fourfold strategy for dealing with the media: (1) public communication policies and guidelines, (2) incorporating media response and incident management strategies, (3) media training, and (4) physical controls. In addition, the SAC‐PAV has formulated a set of guidelines for the media to apply when covering terrorist incidents, indicating clearly what crisis managers and counterterrorism response organizations expect of media handling of public crises.     

Repression and Terrorism: A Cross-National Empirical Analysis of Types of Repression and Domestic Terrorism

While some scholars have theorized that repression reduces terrorism because it raises the costs of participating in terrorist activity by dissidents, others argue that repression stimulates terrorism by either closing off nonviolent avenues for expressing dissent or by provoking or sharpening grievances within a population. This study investigates these contradictory sets of expectations by considering whether or not different specific types of repression yield different effects on patterns of terrorism in 149 countries for the period 1981 to 2006. By assessing the impact of nine specific types of repression on domestic terrorism, the study produces some interesting findings: while, as expected, forms of repression that close off nonviolent avenues of dissent and boost group grievances increase the amount of domestic terrorism a country faces, types of repression that raise the costs of terrorist activity have no discernible suppressing effect on terrorism.     

State Capacity and Terrorism: A Two-Dimensional Approach

Conventional wisdom suggests that dissident groups use terrorism when they face an overwhelmingly more powerful state, yet attacks in developing countries have predominated in the post-Cold War era, suggesting that terrorism is an increasingly weak state phenomenon. Cross-national studies of terrorism find mixed results for how common measures of state capacity influence terrorism. We argue that these indeterminate findings are due in part to a partial understanding of both what constitutes state capacity and how different aspects of state strength or weakness relate to the propensity of groups to use terrorism. We decompose state capacity into two dimensions that we theorize are particularly relevant to dissident groups: military capacity, or the ability to project conventional military force, and bureaucratic/administrative capacity. Our analysis supports the claim that terrorist attacks are more frequently targeted at states with large, technologically sophisticated militaries but less frequently targeted at states with higher bureaucratic and administrative capacity. We also compare two militarily capable states, France and Russia, that have had different recent experiences with terrorism to help illustrate the causal mechanisms involved. Evidence from our models and cases suggest that states can be capable in different ways, and these various capabilities create differing incentives for using terror as a strategic and tactical tool.     

American media messages and public opinion on the Palestinian uprising

The article opens with a review of recent developments which have caused the Neutrality Act of 1794 to reemerge as a legal issue. The article then examines the origins and purposes of the Act, as well as the political climate in the United States and the circumstances that led to its passage. The Neutrality Act was passed with the specific intention of remedying the practice of “privateering.” This problem was prevalent at the time the Act was passed but is no longer a problem today. The article examines early case law interpreting the Act, with specific attention to the definitional problem of how to interpret key words and phrases used in the Act. The early case law demonstrates that the activities of private citizens who fund the Contras do not violate the Act. Another important issue addressed is how the Executive Branch interprets the Act. The article supports the position of the current administration, namely, that the Neutrality Act does not apply to the President when he is exercising his power as sovereign over this nation's foreign affairs. Basically, the article attempts to show that those who are attempting to invoke this law to prohibit private citizens from assisting the Democratic Resistance in Nicaragua are misinterpreting the purpose and scope of the law. Moreover, it would be a great exaggeration of the law to extend it to the activities involved here.     

Analysing Terrorism and Counter-terrorism: A Communication Model

This article analyses terrorism and counter-terrorism within a framework of communication. This analytic framework views violence as a form of communication that interacts with other forms of social and political communication, whether by non-state actors or state actors. By looking at how terrorism and counter-terrorism fit into the wider context of social and political life, both at the national and the international level, the analyst can better understand how terrorism emerges from other social or political activity, how it can evolve into legal or nonviolent action, and how it can be but one tool in a political or social struggle that includes both violent and nonviolent tactics. By including counter-terrorism and the array of control institutions used to battle terrorism and related phenomena, the model forces a degree of self-reflectivity and self-awareness upon the analyst, who must examine societal, state and international institutions and forms of social control alongside strategies and tactics of protest and political agitation. In a post-11 September world, this analytic task is all the more challenging.     

When governments ignore public opinion in foreign policy: Poland and the Iraq invasion

This article asks why the Government of Poland participated in the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 when a large majority of the Polish public was opposed to national involvement in Iraq. The aim is to further an understanding of the circumstances under which democratic governments ignore public opinion in their foreign policy decision-making. The article argues that a combination of three circumstances increased the willingness of the government to ignore the public. First, the Iraq issue had relatively low salience among the Polish voters, which decreased the domestic political risks of pursuing the policy. Second, the government's Iraq policy was supported by a considerable consensus among the political elite. Third, the political elites were unified in their perceptions that participating in the invasion would yield essential international gains for Poland.     

Terrorism: A matter for moral judgement

If politics and military affairs often raise moral questions, terrorism is a politico‐military matter that veritably flings moral problems in our faces. This essay, initially prepared for military chaplains, explains why terrorism is a form of political depravity and a form of armed activity bearing little resemblance to legitimate guerrilla warfare. Dr Harmon analyzes how terrorists nonetheless use arguments ‐ moral and political ‐ to try to transform public attitudes and even paralyze the body politic into inaction and impotence. Common arguments of the terrorists and their public supporters and apologists are analyzed and rebutted. Conclusions include the proposition that internecine blood‐letting among terrorists themselves, and the self‐defeating character of terrorist logic, make these ostensible architects of new societies more adept with the wrecking ball than with the blueprint.     

Global citizenship,anyone? cosmopolitanism,privilege and public opinion

This paper utilises the World Values Survey (WVS) and the Inter-university Survey on Allegiance (ISA) in order to evaluate the claim that cosmopolitanism is elitist. Variants of this claim include: (1) “Cosmopolitanism appeals to almost no one but the rationalist philosophers who articulate it”, (2) “Cosmopolitanism is systematically likely to appeal to privileged individuals”, and (3) “Cosmopolitanism is systematically likely to appeal to privileged societies.” Treating these claims as empirically testable hypotheses, I find that none is strongly supported by available data. Cosmopolitans can therefore be more confident than they have been in defending global citizenship as a practicable and desirable political ideal.     

Terrorism and Human Rights: A Defence Lawyer's Perspective

ABSTRACT

The author of this article is one of the attorneys appointed to represent Zacarias Moussaoui in the United States. Mr. Moussaoui is the only person facing criminal charges for alleged involvement in the September 11 plot. The author describes the system of government in the United States with a specific emphasis on several terrorism cases pending in the United States. He seeks to assure the readers that the rule of law is paramount in the United States. Recent decisions of the Supreme Court—in the Hamdi and Guantanamo cases—that confirm the constitutional rights of even the most dedicated enemies of the United States, which decisions post-date this submission, only affirm the writer's theme.     

A comparison of consensus and voting in public decision making

Conclusion As much as consensus decision making may be in vogue, as much as it may feel like an appropriate and progressive form of civil discourse, it is not without its problems and it may not always be the best avenue to pursue.Policymaking about community problems requires all the creativity we can bring to the task. One of the areas where we might best apply our creativity is in the continual search for improved models of civil discourse and decision making. Consensus-based approaches hold great promise for addressing thorny issues like dispersed public housing, but we need to remember that such methods are relatively new to most of us, and that we are still feeling our way with them.These cautionary comments, however, should not be embraced by public officials as excuses for keeping citizens out of public policy setting. Governments work best ultimately where there is broad consensus for their policies. Bernie Jones is associate director for university resources in the Colorado Center for Community Development at the University of Colorado at Denver, where he also holds an appointment as associate professor of urban and regional planning. His mailing address is Campus Box 128, University of Colorado at Denver, P.O. Box 173364, Denver, Colo. 80217-3364.     

Bridging the communication gap in EU-China relations: policy,media, and public opinion

Asia Europe Journal - Over the past decade, the series of crises in the EU, the rise of China, and the outbreak of the global pandemic have complicated contemporary EU-China relations. In this...     

Ignoring public opinion: the Australian and Polish decisions to go to war in Iraq

This article investigates why the governments of Australia and Poland decided to contribute military forces to the United States led invasion of Iraq in March 2003 when a majority of Australian and Polish citizens were opposed to national involvement in the invasion. The objective of the article is to increase understanding of the conditions under which governments ignore the public in their foreign policymaking. The article examines the explanatory power of four intervening variables: issue salience, elite debate, timing of the next election and the importance assigned to international gains by the government. On the basis of the Direct Method of Agreement, the article concludes that government perceptions of international gains and the timing of the next election were potentially necessary factors for the outcomes of the cases, while issue salience and elite debate were not necessary conditions. A distant election may, thus, provide sufficient electoral protection for a government that conducts a foreign policy to which the public is opposed.     

《恐怖主义与石油》一书观点简介

“9·11”事件拉开了战争史上新时代的序幕,国际恐怖分子将无孔不入,以各种手段制造无限大的恐怖和破坏效应。鉴于石油在当前世界经济与政治中的重要地位,针对世界石油供应的恐怖行动已不再是可能与否的问题,而是一个迟早的问题,国际社会应予以高度警惕。     

Rethinking the Roots of Terrorism: Beyond Orthodox Terrorism Theory—A Critical Research Agenda∗

The orthodox understanding of terrorism does not seem to provide adequate means for explaining the root causes of terrorism. This study is an attempt to critically rethink the roots of terrorism by relocating the study of terrorism into a conceptual space in which it can gain access to the tools provided by conflict studies. As a result this work addresses a gap in the field of terrorism studies and provides an explanation and clarification of the existence of orthodox terrorism discourse and the creation of an alternative theoretical framework for rethinking the roots of terrorism.