Striking Home: Ideal-Type of Terrorism

ABSTRACT

This essay presents some preliminary notes in an anthropological perspective on terrorism. The following aims to be a questioning review of issues that haunt informed students of terrorism, and yet also an introductory text to the study of terrorism. It is revisionist but didactic. The essay is based on extended research of Palestinian and Israeli terrorism cases, and on critical integration of the literature on terrorism. It offers an alternative approach to the problem of the definition and distinct character of terrorism, expands on overlooked aspects of terrorism, like its relationship to the concept of “home,” emphasizes under-theorized subjects, like the randomness of the targets, and discusses hitherto untouched topics, like the “bad death” of terrorism’s victims. Terrorism is examined in terms of liminality and hybridity, and consequently as more subversive than coercive, threatening our ontological security no less than our physical security.     

Too Little,Too Late: The CIA and US Counteraction of the Soviet Initiative in the Six-Day War, 1967

The authors' previous research has established that the 1967 Arab–Israeli Six-Day War resulted from a deliberate Soviet plan to provoke Israel into a pre-emptive strike, which would legitimize and trigger a massive Soviet military intervention to aid an Egyptian–Syrian counteroffensive. However, US documents released until recently provided no evidence that the American intelligence community, and particularly the CIA, detected this threat or informed the political leadership about it – even though some indications were picked up at the field level. A newly declassified, retrospective report appears for the first time to show that there was awareness of major components of the Soviet operation (preparations for a naval landing and parachute drop). But closer scrutiny finds that this report reflects Soviet propaganda more than factual intelligence – thus further tarnishing what has hitherto been held as an outstanding achievement for the Agency and its chief.     

Bribes vs. bombs: A study in Coasean warfare

Warfare is often thought of as the antithesis of Coasean bargaining over entitlements because armed conflicts consume real resources whose destruction could be avoided by negotiated solutions. We argue that fighting and negotiating are not mutually exclusive methods of resolving disputes between nations—there can often be a useful role for bargaining between a state and agents of its enemy, even when armed conflict has broken out between opposing states. We evaluate the efficacy and normative desirability of selectively substituting “bribes” for “bombs” as a means of warfare. We show how inter-country disparities in wealth, differences in military strength, the organization of the bribing and recipient forces, uncertainty about the outcome of the conflict, and communications technology can contribute to the efficacy of bribes. We discuss methods for enforcing bargains struck between opposing forces, a key problem in structuring bribes. We also examine the legal status of bribe agreements, under both international and US law. While the former apparently views bribery as legitimate means of warfare, the latter poses a potentially significant obstacle by refusing on public policy grounds to enforce secret contracts made with foreign agents.     

What shall I do now? Released offenders' expectations for supervision upon release

In an outcome evaluation of recovering addicts who participated in a prison-based therapeutic community, 39 clients (a nonrandomized subsample) were interviewed about their rehabilitation and reintegration experience. The study focused on participants' perceptions of how essential the continuum of treatment and supervision after release was. Whereas many studies have shown that participating in prison-based drug treatment programs reduces likelihood of recidivism, clients in this study suggested that other factors might be equally important-in particular, the importance of the continuum of treatment after release and/or being supervised in the community. Findings are discussed in regard to inmates' expectations, confusion upon release, and formal support mechanisms; suggestions for further research are made.     

Values, Diversity and the Justification of EU Institutions

Liberal theories of justice typically claim that political institutions should be justifiable to those who live under them – whatever their values. The more such values diverge, the greater the challenge of justifiability. Diversity of this kind becomes especially pronounced when the institutions in question are supranational. Focusing on the case of the European Union, this article aims to address a basic question: what kinds of values should inform the justification of political institutions facing a plurality of value systems? One route to an answer is provided by John Rawls, who famously distinguishes between comprehensive and political values, and defends the exclusion of the former from the foundations of a political theory of justice. This article questions the tenability of the Rawlsian solution, and draws attention to an alternative twofold conceptual distinction: that between minimal and non-minimal and between substantive and procedural values. Minimal values are meant to be as independent as possible of controversial conceptions of the good and views of the world, regardless of whether these are comprehensive or purely political. It will be argued that their endorsement may thus further specify the nature of what should be shared in order to justify political institutions in conditions of pluralism. In order to refine further the account of such a basis of justification, two variants of minimalism will be presented according to whether they invest substantive or procedural values. Substantive values qualify the property of an outcome; procedural values qualify the property of a procedure. The latter part of the article consists of a 'face-off' between minimal proceduralism and minimal substantivism, considering reasons in favour of the adoption of each. The result, we suggest, is a helpful reorientation of the political dimension of the value debates to which the multiplicity of values amid contemporary European horizons give rise.     

Reexamining Adolescent Suicidal Ideation: A Developmental Perspective Applied to a Diverse Population

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that suicidal ideation is a common experience in a general population of African American, Hispanic, and White urban high school students residing in low-income neighborhoods. Based upon a developmental framework, it was hypothesized that once attitudes toward suicide were controlled, ideation would not vary significantly by ethnicity, gender, or psychosocial variables usually associated with ideation. The multivariate analysis revealed that ideation did not vary by ethnicity however, females, substance users, and those with greater tolerance toward suicide, higher family coping, and lower self-esteem were more likely to report ideation. A series of ideator profiles, calculated from the probability estimates, showed that an increase in tolerance substantially raises the likelihood of ideation. The results taken together raise the question of whether it is time to reconceptualize the relationship between ideation and normal adolescent development.     

In Defense of Criminal Possession

Criminal law casebooks and treatises frequently mention the possibility that criminal liability for possession is inconsistent with the Voluntary Act Requirement, which limits criminal liability to that which includes an act or an omission. This paper explains why criminal liability for possession is compatible with the Voluntary Act Requirement despite the fact that possession is a status. To make good on this claim, the paper (1) defends the Voluntary Act Requirement, (2) offers an account of the nature of omissions of the kind that need be included in that for which criminal liability is imposed in the absence of a voluntary act, and (3) argues that possession is a status that is constituted in part by an omission of this sort. The result is that to hold people criminally liable for possession is to hold them criminally liable both for a status and for an omission, an omission that is part of what it is to have that status. The paper also distinguishes possession from vagrancy, which is not a proper object of criminal liability, precisely because of constraints placed by the Voluntary Act Requirement. And the paper argues that possession incident to dispossession is not a proper object of criminal liability because it does not involve an omission of the kind that other forms of possession involve.     

More Attempts: A Reply to Duff, Husak, Mele and Walen

In this paper, I reply to the very thoughtful comments on my book by Antony Duff, Doug Husak, Al Mele and Alec Walen.