This thesis explores to what extent coherence across various security spheres has occurred in EU counterterrorism since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. It explores, more specifically, how the principle of coherence has been used to link instruments available in various policy areas, in particular the CFSP, the AFSJ and national security. / Doctorat en Sciences juridiques / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

No description available.

Terrorism, as an act of war, has produced new challenges for states and their militaries in the modern era. A typical response for governments that face a terrorist threat is to reassess their institutional posture toward handling such assaults on their territorial sovereignty, to include a redefinition of the conditions under which their militaries may be used to defend and protect domestic interests. This study aims to determine the conditions under which and to what degree a civilian authority's restructuring of its counterterrorism policy alters civil-military relations within that state, specifically examining the institutional and constitutional constraints under which governments formulate their military's role in counterterrorism policy; the type of institutional arrangement that seems most conducive to a powerful military role in a state's counterterrorism policy; and an exploration of the expansion of military authority in response to terrorism in the United States, Israel, the United Kingdom, and Spain. I argue that democratic states will expand the role and responsibilities of their militaries into what were formerly civilian areas of responsibility as a key tool in the implementation of their counterterrorism policy when military authority is only loosely circumscribed by state constitutional and legislative documents; the military has a history of strong participation in the formulation (versus simply implementation) of a state's national security doctrine; and the military maintains an exalted role in national history and is viewed by the citizenry as a core institution of national identity, and the government is facing both high internal and external threat levels. This study is based on the assumption that institutional arrangements play a significant role in the policymaking process, employing the paradigm of Historical Institutionalism to explain how changes within institutions alter civil-military relations in the context of counterterrorism policy, and vice versa. / text

The United States use of Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAV) or drones for targeted killings of terrorists has been on the rise in recent years and the method has become the core element of president Obamas strategy in the war against terror. This study examines the deterrent effect of targeted killings on terrorism using UCAV/drones as a method of counterterrorism. Building on the literature on counterterrorism, UCAV, targeted killings, deterrence theory and statistics on terrorism the study provides a case study of the CIA drone operations in Pakistan between the years 2004-2010. The goal has been to analyze drone operations and the extent of terrorism from the beginning of the drone campaign until 2010. This as a means of identifying possible trends in terrorism activity due to the occurrence of drone strikes. Findings suggest that the possibility of a deterrent effect is far from evident and that there are some indications of increased terrorism.

This dissertation seeks to assess the degree of integration in the sector of security and defense of the European Union. The emphasis is brought on the Solana era, 1999-2009, as Mr. Solana was the first High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the EU. His mandate was axiomatic in shaping a common security strategy for the Union. In order to measure the degree of integration, this dissertation applied an eclectic theoretical approach on three case studies looking at three distinct levels of analysis: domestic, homeland counterterrorism; regional, energy security vis-à-vis Russia; international, EUPOL Afghanistan mission.

This diploma thesis called 'Performative Power and Terrorism in Europe in the 2010s', deals with the evolution of terrorism, counterterrorism and the use of the theory of performative power, as coined by Beatrice de Graaf in 2010. Since the recent attacks in Paris (13th of November 2015) and Nice (14th of July 2016), terrorism has become a hot topic again for both scholars and policymakers. De Graaf has provided a schedule of fourteen signifiers in order to measure the performativity of authorities, and the extent to which they are capable of influencing public fears and opinion when it comes to terrorism. A schedule that should concretise the way in which theory can be 'translated' to practice. By means of two case studies, regarding the terrorist attacks mentioned above, the theory and its signifiers will be analysed. The result of this analysis was stunning. This paper argues the theory and the signifiers are partially flawed and anachronistic. Although De Graaf considers her theory to be universal, the research conducted in this document reveals shortcomings and proves it does not stand the test of time. In order to make performative power and the signifiers time-resistant it has to be altered. Recommendations are therefore provided at the end of this paper.

In recent years, due to the threat of terrorism, there has been a return of banishment, in contemporary terms better known as citizenship revocation or denationalization. The aim of this thesis is to critically assess the most common arguments used for and against liberal nations’ power to revoke citizenships as punishment and as a means to protect national security. This thesis presents an argumentation analysis of some of the most common philosophical arguments used for and against citizenship revocation in liberal democratic states. The arguments are first described and then evaluated based on their evidentiary strength in order to determine whether citizenship should be unconditional. The thesis concludes that the argumentation analysis indicates that citizenship should be unconditional in a liberal democratic state.

Since 9/11, counterterrorism policies have been one of the crucial policy issues facing the United States. After the attacks on the United States, counterterrorism in this country transformed. Fifteen years later, counterterrorism is typically organized as a one-size fits all approach. This approach generalizes all terrorist threats, trying to target terrorism as a whole. This thesis explains how this is an improper approach to counterterrorism. Instead, policies should be case-specific and created in regards to the specific characteristics embodied by each terrorist organization. These characteristics include history and ideology, organizational and leadership structure, finances, and tactics and targets. These characteristics have been proven to comprise the composition of a one-of-a-kind terrorist organization. Each group expresses these characteristics differently, even if they share the same geographical location or religious background. Through research utilizing academic journal articles, current events, government publications, and published books, it is discovered how the unique characteristics displayed by Islamic Fundamentalist groups have counterterrorism policy implications. In order to portray this, this thesis analyzed characteristics of Al Qaeda, ISIS, and the Taliban. Through these case-studies, it was shown how distinct these groups are from one another and how these differences should be accounted for in counterterrorism policies. Once these differences are implemented into individualist counterterrorism policies, the United States can provide effective policies that target specific aspects of each terrorist organization instead of trying to combat terrorism as a whole.

This paper examines the intersection between human rights and security assistance in Mauritania. In American security assistance broadly, and within the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership specifically, there has been an over-securitization of “whole of government” counterterrorism policy. While the United States recognizes the need to address the social, economic, and political roots of extremism, it has failed to do so in practice. If the United States continues to support Mauritania with conventional security assistance but does not tackle the root causes of extremism, it will ultimately fail in fighting terrorism in the Sahel. In order to succeed, the U.S. government must give greater authority to the Department of State and USAID, create greater accountability for human rights within the Department of Defense, and improve interagency coordination. In the long term, the U.S. government must change its paradigm regarding the relationship between security and human rights.

The study of terrorism has been both broad in scope and varied in approach. Little work has been done, however, on the territorial aspects of terrorist groups. Most terrorist groups are revolutionary to one degree or another, seeking the control of a piece of territory; but for the supportive population of a terrorist group, how important is the issue of territory? Are the intangible qualities of territory more salient to a given population than other factors? Are territorially based terrorist groups more durable than their ideologically or religiously motivated cohorts? This paper aims to propose the validity of the territorial argument for the study of political terrorism.