Terrorism as a strategy of insurgency

This essay describes terrorism as a mode of warfare and examines its unique characteristics, by comparing this method of struggle to other forms of violent conflict. It further emphasizes the role of terrorism as a strategy of insurgence and delineates the main strategic ideas by which terrorists have hoped to achieve their political objectives. The study evaluates terrorists’ success in obtaining political goals and the conditions which affect their ability to materialize their objectives.

The author concludes that the mode of struggle adopted by insurgents is dictated by circumstances rather than by choice, and that whenever possible, insurgents use concurrently a variety of strategies of struggle. Terrorism, which is the easiest form of insurgency, is practically always one of these modes.     

The Usefulness of Examining Terrorists’ Rhetoric for Understanding the Nature of Different Terror Groups

ABSTRACT

This study advances a distinction between two generic types of terrorists’ rhetoric: (1) ideological rhetoric candidly reflecting the terrorists’ genuine beliefs and values regarding their military targeting policy (who is a legitimate target), even when adopting such rhetoric involves high image/diplomatic costs; and (2) a PR-oriented rhetoric which consciously misrepresents the terrorists’ intentions and behavior in an attempt to project a more benign and humane image, thus maintaining sympathy and rebuffing criticism. We contend that such a distinction can provide a highly useful metric for assessing terrorists groups’ rationality and pragmatism: the most pragmatic groups will shift between these two types of rhetoric depending on changing strategic needs. To show the practical usefulness of this distinction we provide criteria for categorizing terrorists’ rhetorical responses to (mostly liberal-minded) criticism that they have killed innocent civilians in their enemy’s camp. We apply our criteria by examining terrorists’ (sincere and insincere) apologies.     

The Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding Ten Years on: Critical Reflections and Stimulating Ideas on an Evolving Scholarship

ABSTRACT

The Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding celebrates its tenth anniversary this year. This special volume opens up with a selection of nine of the most influential articles published in the journal. JISB's editorial team has asked the authors for their reflections on their original articles, telling us more about the writing process at that time, what they would do differently (with hindsight), or how they see their articles contributing to current debates on intervention and statebuilding. We have selected one article per volume, and we have ordered the contribution starting from volume 1 (2007) to volume 9 (2015). The articles will be made open access for the year, and we highly recommend (re-)reading the original articles along with the comments from the authors.     

The Indivisibility of Human Rights

This article defends a novel, normative conception of the indivisibility of human rights. Human rights are indivisible because normative commitment to one mutually entails normative commitment to another. The normative conception enables us to defend three important theoretical and practical corollaries. First, as a conceptual thesis normative indivisibility lets us see how human rights constitute a unified system not liable to the typical counter-examples to indivisibility as mutual indispensability. Second, as a dialectical thesis, normative indivisibility can support linkage arguments in defense of controversial human rights. And third, as a political thesis, normative indivisibility can show why the political thesis of indivisibility means that states lack discretion to ‘pick and choose’ which human rights to implement.     

A classification of terrorist groups

In contradistinction to existing typologies of terrorist organizations by ideology or intent, a functional classification is suggested. By analyzing terrorist groups according to their target population and base of operation, four basic types of organizations are delineated: Domestic‐based xenofighters, foreign‐based xenofighters, domestic‐based homofighters, and foreign‐based homofighters. On the basis of the operational objectives and specific limitations of these types of terrorist groups, it is proposed that xenofighters tend to adopt more indiscriminate tactics than homofighters, and that foreign‐based groups tend to perpetrate international terrorism, and are dependent on foreign countries’ support. Whereas the struggle against foreign‐based terrorists must focus on reducing the sponsoring countries’ motivation to support them, the battlefield regarding domestic‐based groups is home public opinion.     

Using Fact Checking to Improve Information Systems in Argentina

Chequeado is an NGO that was the first fact-checking initiative in Latin America. It began its work in 2010 and aims to improve the quality of public discourse and to raise the cost of lying and spreading misinformation, with a main focus on Argentina. It also leads the Latam Chequea network in the region. The organisation produces regular fact checking articles and explainers, partners with key actors to stop the spread of misinformation on social media, develops state of the art applications and software, and teaches media literacy and data journalism, among other activities. This article outlines anecdotal evidence for the impact of this work, which it is seeking to build on with more research to measure its impact and understand how fact checking can be more effective.     

Risk Exposure,Humanitarianism and Willingness to Pay for Universal Healthcare: A Cross-National Analysis of 28 Countries

Social Justice Research - In this article, we explore the associations of people’s valuations of universal healthcare with risk exposure and humanitarianism across diverse institutional...     

Balancing and the Bible: A Pre-Thucydidean View of Threat

This article uses the case of King Saul, David, and the Philistines, drawn from the Hebrew Bible (books 1 and 2 Samuel), to argue that leaders of states with contested or immature authority structures often elect to prioritize threats to their personal rule over external threats to the integrity and welfare of the states which they lead in a manner not predicted by neo-Realist international relations theory. In making this argument, this article not only makes a contribution to the Realist literature on threat prioritization but introduces a new, novel, and ancient data set which can be used both to generate new theories and to test existing theories within international relations.     

Predictable Policing: Measuring the Crime Control Benefits of Hotspots Policing at Bus Stops

Objectives

A fairly robust body of evidence suggests that hotspots policing is an effective crime prevention strategy. In this paper, we present contradictory evidence of a backfiring effect.

Methods

In a randomized controlled trial, aimed at reducing crime and disorder, London’s ‘hottest’ 102 bus-stops were targeted. Double patrol teams of Metropolitan Police Service uniformed officers visited the stops three times per shift (12:00–20:00), 5-times per week, for a duration of 15 min, over a 6 month period. Crucially, officers arrived and departed the bus stop on a bus, with significantly less time spent outside the bus stop setting. Outcomes were measured in terms of victim-generated crimes reported to the police and bus driver incident reports (DIRs), within targeted and catchment areas. We used adjusted Poisson-regression models to compare differences in pre- and post-treatment measures of outcomes and estimated-marginal-means to illustrate the treatment effect.

Results

DIRs went down significantly by 37 % (p = 0.07) in the near vicinity of the bus stops (50 m), by 40 % in the 100 m catchment area (p = 0.04) and marginally and non-significantly in the farthest catchment (10 %; p = 0.66), compared to control conditions. However, victim-generated crimes—the primary outcome measured in previous experiments—increased by 25 % (p = 0.10) in the near vicinity, by 23 % (p = 0.08) and 11 % (p ≤ 0.001) within the 100–150 m catchment areas, respectively.

Conclusions

These findings illustrate the role of bounded-rationality in everyday policing: reductions in crime are predicated on an elevated perceived risk-of-apprehension. Previous studies focused on clusters of addresses or public facilities, with police moving freely and unpredictably within the boundaries of the hotspot, but the patrol areas of officers in this experiment were limited to bus stops so offenders could anticipate their movements. Hotspots policing therefore backfires when offenders can systematically and accurately predict the temporal and spatial pattern of long-term targeting at a single location.