States are routinely confronted with conflicting duties of maintaining full respect for human rights, on the one hand, and protecting national security and public safety, on the other. This is not least noticeable when States’ sovereignty and the right to control who enters and leaves their territories clash with the obligation to afford protection to refugees fleeing persecution. Some refugees are bound to be dangerous criminals, presenting a serious threat to national security and public safety in the host State. Refugee law prescribe that allegedly serious criminals must be excluded from refugee protection. However, the principle of non-refoulement, as developed and interpreted under international and regional human rights law, prohibits removal of persons if there is risk for torture or ill-treatment in the country of origin. This thesis explores the fact that a person can be considered fundamentally undeserving of protection under refugee law, while protected against removal under human rights law. Persons like this have fittingly been coined undesirable but unreturnable.      The relationship between the relevant provisions on refoulement and exclusion from refugee protection is examined and analyzed, followed by a recount of the effects that this clash of legal regimes and legitimate interests has on the individuals concerned, on the States, and on the integrity of refugee law. Possible solutions to adverse effects are identified and discussed, including the question of whether the principle of non-refoulement, as understood today, is viable in light of the challenges presented to national security and public safety.

This thesis is a study of national security decision making in the Ford Administration. The subject for study is the Kissinger- Schlesinger controversy in the Ford Administration. The thesis will attempt to prove that the differences that emerged over issues of national policy were due to deep theoretical disagreements as to the nature of the international system, the utility of power in the nuclear age and the means by which to preserve detente. An examination of the substantive policy differences will be preceded by an examination of the conceptual disagreements between the Secretaries on topics that are fundamental to any study of international politics. Studies on decision making in intemational politics will be used to show that each man had a different perception of the role that the United States should have in the international system and the usefulness of America's strategic arsenal for the preservation of peace. After having defined the theoretical differences between Kissinger and Schlesinger on issues in international politics, an analysis of the substantive policy disagreements between the two Secretaries will show that they can be directly related to each man's conception of the international system. Policy differences between the two will be shown to have evolved out of disagreements over policy goals, and not policy implementation. Any study of individual decision making in defense and foreign affairs stresses the importance of individual policy makers and of issues. Foreign nations perceive changes in foreign and defense policy goals when new leadership emerges with which they are uncomfortable. It will be shown, through an analysis of the foreign reaction to the Kissinger-Schlesinger controversy, that foreign nations expressed concern for the outcome of this policy split. In particular, it will be shown that the matter was of great interest to the Soviet Union. In conclusion the thesis will reiterate the point that national security decision making in the Ford Administration was unab1e to reach a compromise on issues of policy because of funamental differences between the Secretaries of State and Defense on detente, the definition of the national security in the nuclear age and the negotiating strategy that America should follow with the Soviets on arms limitations. These differences on policy were made inevitable due to differing models that each Secretary had on the nature of the international system. The study of their individual perceptions will help to give one an understanding as to why the policy disagreements made compromise impossible.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / The global climate is creating more ice-free waters in the Arctic. These new navigation possibilities around the Arctic lead to increased global trade, tourism, and oil and gas exploration. With the foreseeable increased nautical transportation through the Northwest Passage, the United States needs to revisit its security posture in and around the Bering Strait. At least five different grand strategies are potentially relevant in addressing this question. By comparing the suggestions of these leading grand strategy approaches to what has actually been implemented by the United States in the Strait of Hormuz, the Strait of Malacca, and the Panama Canal, similarities emerge that can help the United States shape their strategy for the defending of its national interests in the Bering Strait. By testing the different grand strategies against three reasonably similar cases, I find that a forward military presence and supporting a liberal institutionalist approach are the two key aspects that the United States should employ in the Bering Strait. Increasing and improving the military presence that the United States has in the region should be a top priority. In addition, supporting the Arctic Council would provide an increased level of security to the United States and other nations in the region. This strategy is not without its challenges and it will require artful statecraft in order to be successful.

No description available.

Refugee espionage, the act of spying on individuals to gather information for a foreign state, is illegal in Sweden. In this study, this phenomenon is considered part of transnational repression, an increasing threat against primarily dissidents posed by authoritarian states.  By using the method of qualitative content analysis on texts from the Swedish parliament and four large Swedish newspapers, the study attempts to answer questions about the debate on refugee espionage in the Swedish parliament and media. The timespan ranges from 2014- 2023. How do debaters talk about sovereignty and national security in relation to refugee espionage? Do debaters discuss the digital dimension: the opportunities, and risks from digital technology, in relation to refugee espionage?  The theoretical perspective is based on Lucas Kello’s cybertheory in international relations, on how cyberspace alters relations between states and has the possibility of expanding and enhancing ways to perform espionage.  Results reveal that debaters see refugee espionage as a threat to both Swedish sovereignty and national security. However, the debate rarely touches on concerns with digital technology as a mean to use refugee espionage against a state.

Zero-days are vulnerabilities that the software vendor does not know about and thus cannot provide a patch for. Their value has caused markets to develop, divided by the purchase intention. This thesis focuses on the white and grey markets, that is those buying to patch and those buying to exploit. While states generally have an interest in both, they currently spend money to exploit zerodays, keeping software insecure. The lack of knowledge and awareness surrounding this practice is the problem targeted in this thesis. Serious games, aiming to be both entertaining and educational, represent one opportunity to create awareness. They fit our circumstances particularly well because understanding the problem space requires adversarial thinking and lots of different concepts. Our research goal has thus been to create a serious game that accurately illuminates the dilemma experienced by states. Design science was the research strategy employed to reach the stated goal. Our main contribution is Minimator, a multiplayer, web-based game in which players, acting as states, have to protect their infrastructure and deal with zero-day markets. Additionally, we present a formal model of states’ treatment of zero-day markets developed using game theory and shown to resemble the n-players prisoners’ dilemma. An expert evaluation was conducted, delivering promising results in terms of gameplay appeal, and accuracy. A naturalistic evaluation remains, but is suggested in detail for future endeavours. Minimator is original as, to our knowledge, no similar artefact exists. It provides value by potentially creating a starting point for and encouraging an informed, public debate about the trade-off between national and infrastructure security, which is inherently political.

This thesis examines the development of Wahhabism as an ideology into a rapidly expanding, transportable, contemporary Islamic political system. Serving as the territorial foundation, individuals maintain allegiance to Makkah, the center of the Islamic world, through symbolic Islamic prayer. Along with a central, globally financed economic distributive mechanism, and Wahhabi social and educational institutions emerging from the traditional mosque, Wahhabism serves the demand for an Islamic political system in a late capitalist world. Wahhabism is fluid within contemporary dynamic political systems and rapidly changing international relations. Wahhabism continues to expand at a global level, at times, providing a foundation for new forms of contemporary terrorism.

No / Nowhere in the world is the demand for peace more prominent and challenging than in Africa. From state collapse and anarchy in Somalia to protracted wars and rampant corruption in the Congo; from bloody civil wars and extreme poverty in Sierra Leone to humanitarian crisis and authoritarianism in Sudan, the continent is the focus of growing political and media attention. This book presents the first comprehensive overview of conflict and peace across the continent. Bringing together a range of leading academics from Africa and beyond, "Peace and Conflict in Africa" is an ideal introduction to key themes of conflict resolution, peacebuilding, security and development. The book's stress on the importance of indigenous Africa approaches to creating peace makes it an innovative and exciting intervention in the field.

The attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) caused thousands of deaths, national and global panic, and immediate action by the federal government to protect the borders of the United States of America (USA) from terrorism. In response to these attacks, the United States (U.S.) government enacted laws for law enforcement agencies to protect against terrorist activities. Law enforcement agencies are effective in combating terrorism, but their measures contain a major flaw - the improper use of race in profiling to address national security and public safety concerns. Racial profiling is an ineffective measure for preventing terrorism. There are solutions to correct this flaw through reconstructing training and implementing policies for all law enforcement agencies. The intent of this thesis is to discuss the history and the effectiveness of profiling in U.S. post-9/11 counterterrorism through theoretical research of peer-reviewed journals and articles, relevant laws, and United States Supreme Court cases to offer solutions to the problems racial profiling presents. The discussion will generate a search for new ways law enforcement agencies could conduct daily counterterrorism operations.

No description available.