Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe conflicts in Iraq and Syria have led to concerns in the West over 'foreign fighters'. Although states are anxious about the role these individuals play in the conflicts they join, their primary concern relates to the perceived 'terrorist' threat they pose on their return. This fear has led to an evolution in the international policymaking arena, with foreign fighters now often referred to as 'foreign terrorist fighters' (FTFs). A Critical Theory-inspired immanent critique is offered to highlight various problems that exist with the FTF term and to argue policymakers should resist its use. The article demonstrates the importance of language by showing how the invocation of the FTF threat has strengthened the ongoing development of globally coordinated counterterrorism action. Specifically, it argues UN Security Council Resolution 2178, agreed in 2014, generates a legal obligation upon UN member states to implement new counterterrorism laws at national level to combat the perceived threat from FTFs. The article highlights the negative effect these laws have on human rights. It is argued institutions like the UN need to ensure new counterterrorism legal instruments are built from a human rights rather than security-first perspective if commitments to human rights in transnational counterterrorism are to be fully realised.

This article analyses the European Union's response to the threat of the 'returning foreign fighter' (referred to with increasing frequency as the 'foreign terrorist fighter'), arguing that it has been characterized by a move to (re)frame migration and border control as essential aspects of EU counter-terrorism policy. The article offers three important observations on the significance of this move. First, it critiques the way in which the EU's response to this problem is based upon and reinforces a narrow understanding of returning foreign fighters. Second, it argues that the EU has invoked the threat from returning foreign fighters not with the sole intention of preventing terrorism but rather as part of the ongoing securitization of migration and the EU border. Third, it suggests that the threat from returning foreign fighters has been invoked as a way of further legitimizing the EU's emerging role as a security actor and its embrace of preemptive security practice. The article argues throughout that the move to construct the returning foreign fighter issue in this way has important political and social implications for all categories of migrant, with migrant populations now deemed a potential source of terrorist threat.

© The Author(s) 2019. This article analyses the European Union's response to the threat of the 'returning foreign fighter' (referred to with increasing frequency as the 'foreign terrorist fighter'), arguing that it has been characterized by a move to (re)frame migration and border control as essential aspects of EU counter-terrorism policy. The article offers three important observations on the significance of this move. First, it critiques the way in which the EU's response to this problem is based upon and reinforces a narrow understanding of returning foreign fighters. Second, it argues that the EU has invoked the threat from returning foreign fighters not with the sole intention of preventing terrorism but rather as part of the ongoing securitization of migration and the EU border. Third, it suggests that the threat from returning foreign fighters has been invoked as a way of further legitimizing the EU's emerging role as a security actor and its embrace of preemptive security practice. The article argues throughout that the move to construct the returning foreign fighter issue in this way has important political and social implications for all categories of migrant, with migrant populations now deemed a potential source of terrorist threat.

The purpose of this article is to explore the ways in which the European Union (EU)'s counter-terrorism discourse, the 'fight against terrorism', is constructed, and the ways in which it functions both rhetorically and in practice. It argues that 'EU identity' is constituted through and is central to the constitution of EU counter-terrorism policy. The approach taken is constructivist in nature, drawing on a discourse analysis of primarily European Council policy documents, as well as the reports and speeches of the EU Counter-Terrorism Co-ordinator. In particular, it identifies three strands of the discourse that, it is argued, play a key role in the construction of a terrorist 'other'. These three strands include terrorism as crime and as an emotive act of violence; terrorism as an act perpetrated solely by non-state actors; and terrorism as a 'new' and 'evolving' threat. The article proceeds in three steps. First, it outlines the theoretical considerations that underpin this research, including its empirical application. Second, it demonstrates how each strand of the discourse is constructed. Third, it discusses the functioning of the discourse, including the contested nature of the 'terrorism knowledge' that underpins the EU's counter-terrorism approach. The article concludes by reflecting on what this case study contributes to our understanding of EU counter-terrorism policy, as well as explaining how the notion of the terrorist 'other' could provide the basis for a future research agenda that deepens our understanding of how the identity of the EU is constituted.

This article argues that the EU counter-terrorism policy reflects a deep-rooted mistrust or fear of the 'migrant other'. The first half of the article focuses on the discursive construction of terrorism and the concept of securitisation. Drawing on Foucault and in line with scholars such as Campbell (1992), Milliken (1999) and Hülsse and Spencer (2008) the concept of discourse advocated here is one that is above individual discourse participant; the EU is a place where power/knowledge meets and is refracted back into social and political life. An alternative conception of securitisation is offered in order to demonstrate the processes involved in the discursive construction of the 'migrant other' as a security threat. The second half of the article will identify two meta-narratives linked to the construction of the 'migrant other' within the EU counter-terrorism policy. The first of these narratives constructs the 'terrorist other' as a threat to the globalised, 'open' society of the EU. This has the implicit effect of constructing and conflating the 'migrant other' with the threat of terrorism. The second meta-narrative that will provide the focus of analysis is a contingency-based discourse that constructs the 'migrant other' as in need of control in order to prevent the possibility of future terrorist attacks. Having identified these two narratives they will then be subject to a first and second level critical discourse analysis in order to analyse how discursive practices work internally within the EU counter-terrorism policy texts; and the broader political and ethical consequences of the discursive representations identified within the texts. The article concludes by arguing that the impact of the discursive construction of EU counter-terrorism policy is the securitisation of migration and asylum policy and the normalisation of the 'migrant other' as a security threat.

This article analyses the European Union's (EU) construction of the threat of cyberterrorism. Through the application of interpretive discourse analysis, the article identifies several key strands that underpin the construction of the cyberterrorist threat within the political and security institutions of the EU. Locating the analysis within the literature pertaining both to the EU as a security actor and to cyber-security, the article identifies the emergence of the perceived threat of cyberterrorism within the EU discourse on emerging security threats. The article scrutinizes the meaning(s) ascribed to this threat, arguing that although cyberterrorism has not been conclusively defined by the EU, the threat has been invoked as a means of legitimizing existing and future security practices. In particular, the threat of cyberterrorism has been ascribed significance with respect to the need to implement harmonized, high standards for the securing of critical infrastructure across the EU and its member states.

AbstractThis article analyses the European Union's (EU) construction of the threat of cyberterrorism. Through the application of interpretive discourse analysis, the article identifies several key strands that underpin the construction of the cyberterrorist threat within the political and security institutions of the EU. Locating the analysis within the literature pertaining both to the EU as a security actor and to cyber‐security, the article identifies the emergence of the perceived threat of cyberterrorism within the EU discourse on emerging security threats. The article scrutinizes the meaning(s) ascribed to this threat, arguing that although cyberterrorism has not been conclusively defined by the EU, the threat has been invoked as a means of legitimizing existing and future security practices. In particular, the threat of cyberterrorism has been ascribed significance with respect to the need to implement harmonized, high standards for the securing of critical infrastructure across the EU and its member states.

This article argues that the new EU Counter-Terrorism Agenda is based on logics of anticipatory action. Three types of anticipatory action that are central to the development of EU counter-terrorism are identified: preparedness, precaution and preemption. We argue that while the original EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy contained a mixture of these three forms of anticipatory action, the new Counter-Terrorism Agenda places a renewed emphasis on preemptive measures with preparedness given less prominence. The reinforcing of preemptive security practice is most vividly reflected in the CT Agenda's new Anticipate workstream, which emphasises the utility of preemptive computer-based technologies, including Artificial Intelligence and algorithms, as key dimensions of the response to terrorism. The article identifies challenges of transparency and effectiveness that arise when applying computer-based technologies to counter-terrorism, highlighting the importance of regulatory oversight if the EU's commitment to the development of security policies that respect fundamental rights is to be guaranteed.

This article analyses the European Union's (EU) construction of the threat of cyberterrorism. Through the application of interpretive discourse analysis, the article identifies several key strands that underpin the construction of the cyberterrorist threat within the political and security institutions of the EU. Locating the analysis within the literature pertaining both to the EU as a security actor and to cyber-security, the article identifies the emergence of the perceived threat of cyberterrorism within the EU discourse on emerging security threats. The article scrutinizes the meaning(s) ascribed to this threat, arguing that although cyberterrorism has not been conclusively defined by the EU, the threat has been invoked as a means of legitimizing existing and future security practices. In particular, the threat of cyberterrorism has been ascribed significance with respect to the need to implement harmonized, high standards for the securing of critical infrastructure across the EU and its member states.