Counterterrorism Research Research Articles

The Constraints Hypothesis: Rethinking Causality in Deradicalisation, Disengagement and Reintegration Pathways. A Complex Systems Perspective

This paper re-frames the concept of causality in deradicalisation, disengagement and reintegration pathways. Analysis of the theories and frameworks in counter-terrorism research indicate that prevalent causal models offer reductive explanations of human behavior, revealing the absence of a scientifically credible account of how agents undergo transformation in pathways out of terrorism. To address the problem of causality, I borrow from the thought bank of complexity theory and reconceptualise causality as the operation of “constraints.” The paper then goes on to operationalize the concept of constraints for counter-terrorism researchers and practitioners, laying down a new and preliminary conceptual framework for thinking about how people leave terrorism behind.

Corrigendum to: Thinking Beyond Extremism: A Critique of Counterterrorism Research on Right-Wing Nationalist and Far-Right Social Movements

Corrigendum to: Thinking Beyond Extremism: A Critique of Counterterrorism Research on Right-Wing Nationalist and Far-Right Social Movements

The Implication of Terrorism’s Extremely Low Base Rate

ABSTRACT A robust empirical finding is that global neojihadi terrorism is extremely rare in Western countries compared to other kinds of violence. Its base rate in the West is about 3 new global neojihadis per 100 million people per year. Bayesian conditional probability shows that this extremely low base rate ensures that any attempt to detect a potential global neojihadi on the basis of imperfectly specific indicators (conditions) will generate a large number of false positives. This finding has practical implications for a preventive counterterrorism strategy based on detection of potential global neojihadi terrorists using these indicators derived from counterterrorism research. Detection instruments based on them produce many false positives, namely overt sympathizers, who, absent state agents’ entrapment, never cross the line to political crime and violence. The state pursuit of false positives not only diverts scarce resources from targeting true threats but also results in unfair harassment, persecution, and even prosecution of these false positives. This paper suggests that, as scholars whose work helps craft these indicators, we have the moral duty to teach state practitioners about this relatively neglected implication of the extremely low base rate of global neojihadi terrorism.

The Conflict Sensitivity Principle: Can Best Practice in Conflict Research Fill the Ethics Gap in Terrorism and Counterterrorism Research Practice?

ABSTRACT This article explores how best practice in conflict research can address some of the key gaps and limitations of the terrorism research field with regards to research ethics. It draws from conflict research literature, as well as the authors’ primary research experience in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States (FCAS) and in the policy-oriented field of Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism (P/CVE). The analysis focuses on “conflict sensitivity” and the methodological approaches that have been developed and refined under the framework of that principle, including Systems Conflict Analysis. We seek to demonstrate how the integration of research methods related to conflict sensitivity represents an appropriate and fitting research agenda, through which relevant limitations of terrorism research can be addressed. This research agenda emphasizes, among other aspects, the need for solid primary research grounded in a detailed understanding of the local context, a departure from the narrow understanding of the Do No Harm principle in terrorism research, and a greater awareness about the relationship between research ethics and research methods.

BEST STUDENT PAPER SOCIETY FOR TERRORISM RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2019. Politics as counterterrorism: the role of diplomacy in the West German response to Palestinian terror, 1970–75

ABSTRACT When states face international terrorism, their response almost automatically lies in the area of foreign policy. As such, actors in foreign policy making play a key, yet understudied role in this process. In this paper, I will therefore analyse West German foreign policy responses to Palestinian terrorism in the 1970s, which evolved from technical to diplomatic measures. The focus will be on the role of diplomats, not least on their sustained and expanding efforts to negotiate with representatives of violent Palestinian organisations after terror attacks affecting West Germany. This paper thereby shows the potential of a more actor-focused counterterrorism research agenda. Moreover, from a methodological standpoint it also illustrates how archival material can help to uncover the internal dynamics and complexities of governmental decision-making when it comes to counterterrorism.

Terrorism Prevention and Counterterrorism Research Center of Excellence—Lead (DHS)

Federal Grants & ContractsVolume 43, Issue 17 p. 4-4 Grant Alerts Terrorism Prevention and Counterterrorism Research Center of Excellence—Lead (DHS) First published: 06 August 2019 https://doi.org/10.1002/fgc.30573Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume43, Issue178 August 2019Pages 4-4 RelatedInformation

Terrorism Prevention and Counterterrorism Research Center of Excellence—Partner (DHS)

Federal Grants & ContractsVolume 43, Issue 17 p. 4-5 Grant Alerts Terrorism Prevention and Counterterrorism Research Center of Excellence—Partner (DHS) First published: 06 August 2019 https://doi.org/10.1002/fgc.30574Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume43, Issue178 August 2019Pages 4-5 RelatedInformation

Another Form of American Exceptionalism? A Comparative Analysis of Terrorism Sting Operations in the US and Abroad

ABSTRACT Sting operations can potentially thwart terrorist plots, but could also threaten civil liberties and alienate communities, making them a critical subject for counterterrorism research. Yet despite considerable research on U.S. cases, little is known about terrorism stings elsewhere. How common are such cases abroad, and how many feature strong entrapment claims or result in entrapment-related acquittals? In this study, data are gathered about non-U.S. terrorism stings, each of which is evaluated for entrapment indicators. Results show that, contrary to claims of American exceptionalism, terrorism stings could be identified in twenty-one countries, and the average number of entrapment indicators per case is similar between the U.S. and several countries. In addition, several non-U.S. cases present entrapment claims as strong as some of the most-criticized U.S. cases. However, relatively few non-U.S. terrorism stings (fifty-one) could be identified, while there are 156 U.S. cases. In addition, unlike in the U.S., courts have acquitted defendants on entrapment grounds in a high proportion of non-U.S. cases. Political, cultural, and legal differences between the U.S. and other countries, and certain cross-national commonalities, are identified as likely accounting for these results. Potential implications of these findings for terrorism prevention and legal reform are considered.

Can a Copycat Effect be Observed in Terrorist Suicide Attacks?

The purpose of this paper is to explore how a copycat effect – established within the field of suicide studies – may manifest itself in terrorist suicide attacks, and takes an exploratory approach in evaluating the prospect of incorporating open-data resources in future counter-terrorism research. This paper explores a possible ‘copycat effect’ in cases of suicide terrorism, which entails a perpetrator being inspired by a preceding attack to carry out a similar attack not long after the original. In the wake of mounting risks of lone wolf terrorist attacks today and due to the general difficulties faced in preventing such attacks, in this paper we explore a potential area of future prevention in media reporting, security and anti-terrorism policies today. Using the START Global Terrorism Database (GTD), this paper investigates terrorist suicide-attack clusters and analyses the relationship between attacks found within the same cluster. Using a mixed-method approach, our analyses did not uncover clear evidence supporting a copycat effect among the studied attacks. These and other findings have numerous policy and future research implications.

Authenticating the writings of Julius Caesar

In this paper, we shed new light on the authenticity of the Corpus Caesarianum, a group of five commentaries describing the campaigns of Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), the founder of the Roman empire. While Caesar himself has authored at least part of these commentaries, the authorship of the rest of the texts remains a puzzle that has persisted for nineteen centuries. In particular, the role of Caesar’s general Aulus Hirtius, who has claimed a role in shaping the corpus, has remained in contention. Determining the authorship of documents is an increasingly important authentication problem in information and computer science, with valuable applications, ranging from the domain of art history to counter-terrorism research. We describe two state-of-the-art authorship verification systems and benchmark them on 6 present-day evaluation corpora, as well as a Latin benchmark dataset. Regarding Caesar’s writings, our analyses allow us to establish that Hirtius’s claims to part of the corpus must be considered legitimate. We thus demonstrate how computational methods constitute a valuable methodological complement to traditional, expert-based approaches to document authentication.

Towards a Theory of Fear Management in the Counter-Terrorism Domain

Since 9/11, the state of the art in counter-terrorism research, counter-terorism measures and counter-terrorism impacts has taken off. Nevertheless, countering terrorism as a branch of fear management is still a discipline to be developed. In this Research Paper, authors Prof. Dr. Edwin Bakker and Prof. Dr. Beatrice de Graaf attempt to lessen this gap. The […]

Current Chemical and Biological Counter-Terrorism (CBCT) Research and Development in the Department of National Defence [Canada[

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Counterterrorism research and development

Counterterrorism research and development