Reporters' work from a country at war sooner or later gets subjected to censorship. That the job of war correspondents is dangerous has been proved by the number of journalists who get killed every year and by certain "rules of wartime journalism". The article looks into some forms of wartime censorship in the earlier NATO military actions, describes the censorship during the aggression on the Republic of Croatia, and on the basis of the available information, deals with the relevant situation in SR Yugoslavia. At the time when this article was written (May 1999), NATO's military intervention in that country was still going on; consequently, the newspaper censorship was still very much in force there. (SOI : S. 135)
The author analyses the genesis and the scenarios of the Kosovo crisis resolution, as well as the possible political reverberations of the NATO military intervention. The premise is that the Kosovo crisis is only a continuation of the break-up of the former Yugoslavia, that Kosovo has for centuries been a separate entity largely populated by Albanians, that the policy of Serbian nationalism has permanently discriminated against the Albanian population and that prior to the recent air strikes against Yugoslavia Serbia had systematically led an ethnic-cleansing campaign on Kosovo. Although the author recognises that the support for the NATO military action can hardly be found in the tenets of the UN Charter, he argues that it can nevertheless be justified by international law. He points out that NATO's military campaign enjoyed a broad support of the people of NATO member countries, but that it has made a rift in the European left. The new left was in the forefront of the action, while the old, dogmatic and sectarian left, found itself in the ranks of its most vocal opponents. The author claims that Milosevic, with his overall politics, and particularly his policy on Kosovo, had propelled the West into an action it could not extricate itself from. He concludes that the consequences of Belgrade's defeat will be: 1. The collapse of Milosevic' regime (the beginning of his end); 2. The final incapacitation of Milosevic' politics to create new conflicts; 3. The protectorate over Kosovo and its autonomy, with a factual independence from Serbia; 4 The independence of Montenegro; 5. Reinforcing the Dayton policy in Bosnia and Herzegovina (eliminating centrifugal tendencies); 6. The organised participation of the West in the transitional processes in this region (The Pact on the Stability of Southeast Europe); 7. Bolstering the democratic and weakening the undemocratic tendencies in the region. (SOI : S. 14)
Autor se bavi odnosima Sjedinjenih Država i Venezuele zaključno sa aktuelnom predsedničkom krizom ne bi li odgovorio na pitanje kako i zašto je Venezuela postala problem za spoljnu politiku SAD koji zahteva pojačanu pažnju i radikalne mere. Analiza ovih odnosa u toku 20. veka pokazuje da su oni zasnovani na naftnoj međuzavisnosti dveju država. Kada je krajem veka višedecenijsko loše upravljanje naftnim bogatstvom u Venezueli izazvalo društvenu i ekonomsku krizu koja je dovela na vlast Huga Cháveza, spremnog da koristi prihode od nafte protiv interesa regionalne hegemonije SAD, ove su Venezuelu označile kao problem. Američki establišment je prema tom problemu nastupio oportunistički – naftna međuzavisnost je sprečavala da sukob eskalira sve dok aktuelna ekonomsko-politička kriza u Venezueli nakon Chávezove smrti nije dala Washingtonu priliku za konačni obračun sa režimom, po cenu privremenog prekida u trgovini naftom. Godinu i po dana od izbijanja predsednička kriza u Venezueli još nije razrešena, jer se čavistički režim održao, a SAD odustale od vojne intervencije, pa autor nastoji da ukaže na perspektive problema i mogućnosti njegovog prevazilaženja nakon što tekuća pandemija korona virusa bude obuzdana. ; The author deals with the United States and Venezuela relations up to the current presidential crisis, in order to answer how and why Venezuela became a problem for U.S. foreign policy which requires increased attention and radical measures. The analysis of these relations during the 20th century shows that they were based on oil interdependence of the two states. When a decades-long mismanagement of oil riches in Venezuela at the end of the century caused a social and economic crisis that brought to power Hugo Chávez, who was ready to use oil revenues against U.S. regional hegemonic interests, it marked Venezuela as a problem. American establishment treated the problem with opportunism – oil interdependence prevented the conflict from escalating until the current economic and political crisis in Venezuela after the death of Chávez gave Washington an opportunity for the final clash with the regime at the price of a temporary break in the oil trade. A year and a half after the presidential crisis in Venezuela erupted, it has not been resolved yet, for the chavista regime remained in place, while the U.S. gave up on military intervention. The author points to the perspectives of the problem and the possibilities of its overcoming once the current coronavirus pandemic gets contained.
The original NATO strategy regarding Yugoslavia has, despite its military triumphs, proved deficient for achieving the planned political objectives. That is why the existing alliance strategy has been given up and replaced by a new one. This change of direction is under way; the success of NATO's entire military action hinges on its success, as do the relations on the Balkans and the future of NATO's new strategic concept designed in late April at the Washington summit. (SOI : S. 67)
In the introduction, the author analyses Clinton's approach to Europe and the European NATO allies, particularly his wish to develop the partnership and to expand the Alliance. The new post-cold-war relations in Europe contributed to the stronger American-European ties - the foundation of atlantism. This new model of relations is discussed in relation to the emerging challenges that pose the key questions: the creation of a new joint strategy, the problems of NATO's "out of area" interventions and the creation of such European relations that will not provoke uncalled-for Russian reactions. Seen within such a framework, NATO is going to remain the chief proponent of military-political actions of the developed world in which US is to play the leading role. (SOI : S. 102)
The war in Kosovo and Metohia was the result of a decade long tensions between ethnic Serbs and Albanians. It was led from the air in order to avoid more potential victims in case of land invasion. The end of war was the result of mutual concessions: from NATO side and the Serbian one. The sovereignty of FRY was not put into question, but a great autonomy of Kosovo was predicted including the possibility of independence acquisition (secession). The Resolution 1244 was not abolished, but it was being derogated in order to prepare the fundament of Kosovo independence. Serbian military-security forces were withdrawn from the territory of Kosovo and Metohia. NATO intervention was not legal from the point of view of international law, but it subordinated sovereignty to human rights. Intervention was justified in cases of humanitarian need. Event though humanitarian need (catastrophe) is taken as the basis for the intervention, the example of such kind could not be found in the past. So, Kosovo cases were qualified as sui generis one. Thus, the war in Kosovo became an example to be followed in the future, and an unresolved situation may become the threat to the peace and security in the surrounding countries. Democratic countries give themselves the right to interfere and intervene into internal affairs of others differently from the autocratic ones, which was supposed to be neither correct nor consistent. Kosovo conflict and war rattled global power structure, especially with China and Russia as new challengers of the USA power. Both countries are trying hard to reach USA, but they are still in transition with unstable financial systems, migrations and unresolved system of social protection. Regarding Kosovo conflict and war, they engaged themselves rather indirectly than directly. As Security Council permanent members they were voting against the independence of Kosovo, but did not involve themselves into the war directly. Kosovo war showed how China is backward regarding war technique, and Russia regarding financial engagement. In addition, China expected membership in WTO, and Russia a great financial assistance. Russia engaged in negotiations via the Contact Group. With the arrival of Putin, Russia could not engage in Balkan more militarily but only commercially due to the fact most Balkan countries entered NATO or Partnership for Peace Programme. Internal cohesion of Russia with centralistic governance was reinforced, and ethnic tensions were calmed down. The perspective of Russia is United Nations and commerce through pipeline.
NATO's military action in Yugoslavia is a pivotal event that is going to leave an indelible impact on the further direction of international relations. The author first analyses the underlying causes of the campaign, among which were: the international community's resolve to finally punish Milosevic', be instrumental in eliminating his regime, drive out Russian interests from the Balkans, espouse a positive stance towards Muslim countries and, finally, the internal political American reason: the desire to strengthen President Clinton's position. This action has also had a manifold significance for the new world order since it poses the questions of the world order's content and nature, its leadership and norms in a new light. In the process of establishing of the new post-cold-war relations, various tendencies that will pave the way to the new millennium will clash. On the one hand, there will be the exclusive approach based on force and interests, and on the other, the desire to establish the relations in which human rights will be the fundamental criterion for assessing the suitability of a country for a full membership in the newly unified international community. (SOI : S. 24)
The Serbo-Albanian conflict on Kosovo has had direct repercussions for the Balkan security in the last 150 years. That is why the international community would from time to time pay more attention to this conflict, but never long enough to resolve it for good. Both the Serbian and the Albanian side put in a lot of effort towards the resolution of the conflict and came up with several proposals, ranging from various modes of Kosovo autonomy to the idea of cantonisation and re-federalisation of SR Yugoslavia to the independence of Kosovo or its being turned into a protectorate. All these suggestions had mostly been one-sided, either pro-Serbian or pro-Albanian, none of them conducive to a compromise. All this eventually resulted in a military conflict and the attempt to impose solutions by force. Nevertheless, after the NATO intervention, negotiations will have to be resumed and the familiar proposals for the resolution of the Kosovo question will have to be rehashed, only this time this will require much more good will and willingness to make compromises, both on the Albanian and the Serbian side, as well as a considerable support of international community. (SOI : S. 60)
Despite the progress in all fields, modern society is facing the development of the means of political violence. Technological development also has its dangerous side. Many researches in the field of science are often carried out for the sake of military needs, and scientific researchers are often misused in military purpose. Political violence represents one of the greatest threats for the democratic development and human rights in contemporary society. The main goal of this paper is to analyze the position of political violence in contemporary society, particularly focusing on its covert use by the great powers, which is often justified by the struggle for democracy and achieving human rights. In that sense this paper is divided into two parts. The first part analyzes the globalization process, underling that this process has double face, whose negative side can significantly contribute to the spread of political violence. In the second part the author deals with the relations between policy and violence in contemporary society. The paper underlines the need for critical approach to political violence. This critical approach is crucial for understanding of political violence which is the first step in the fight against it. Political violence is not always negative and sometimes can have a positive role, especially when it comes to defensive war and combating terrorism. But the main problem here is that this can be misused to justify political violence in general. What is positive and what is the negative role of political violence often depends on the perspective of observation. Unfortunately, it seems that the privilege to enforce the standard today is reserved only for great powers, and they have become main judges who decide when political violence is to be approved of or not. This is the way in which a war becomes humanitarian interventions, protection of human rights, etc. That is why it is of great importance to encourage and initiate all actions in science which aim to understand and counter this complex phenomenon.
Was Wesley Clark, NATO's commander-in-chief, right when he said that, instead of launching the operation 'Allied Force' against it, the allies shoul have electronically isolated SR Yugoslavia? Yugoslav hackers and crackers used to good advantage the freedom of the cyberspace. During NATO's intervention, they declared a real 'virtual war' to all the countries supportive of this campaign, particularly to the USA. By swooping down by all available means on numerous official web pages of various American institutions and totally abusing the communicational freedoms on the Net, Yugoslav hackers in fact demonstrated a small part of the possibilities of the new e-force. However, the deleterious consequences of Yugoslav on-line users' activities were so harmful that they prodded the international community into issuing a blunt warning to the Serbian Telecom - we shall switch you off from the Internet! The objective of this research is primarily to evidence a totally novel phenomenon on the Internet, the first organized virtual war taking place in the cyberspace, at the time when a real military campaign was waged against SRY. One of the outcomes of these activities was striking out' the documents from the Net that had been preserved only in this texts' authors' archive. There are no additional scientific resources, since the key sources for this article were the Internet and newspaper articles. Although envisaged as a medium available to all, the Internet must soon be safeguarded and protected by legal means. Otherwise, it might simply cave in under the onslaught of all abuses and innumerable viruses circulating the global cyberspace. Due to the increase in the number of users and services, it may be expected that soon a completely new branch of criminal law is to emerge - computer crime. (SOI : PM: S. 242)
In this paper the author points out to the importance of main organizations for establishing of international peace and security. They are the following: League of Nations, United Nations, Organizations of European Security and Co-operation, Conference of European Security and Co-operation, European Council, West European Union and NATO. Until the end of the Cold war, the universal organizations have played primordial role, but after the mentioned period the regional ones took the lead. The reason lies in the shift in balance of power - from bipolar to unipolar. The League of Nations and CESC can be observed from the historic perspective. NATO and UN played a crucial role during the internationalization of Kosovo issue and the act of intervention itself. NATO demonstrated its power and proved in the absence of real balance of power, la force l'emporte sur le droit. On the other hand, UN had passed several resolutions that condemned violence in Kosovo and Metohia (1160, 1199 and 1203 - all passed in 1998). During 1999 Security Council had passed a famous Resolution 1244, by which it was decided a civic and military mission should be established in Kosovo and Metohia - UNMIK and KFOR KFOR dealt with security issues in order to ensure the respect of it to all nationalities in Kosovo and Metohia. UNMIK set a very ambitious task lying ahead trying to establish standards before the future status. Realizing that it would be impossible to reach the standards, UNMIK started with the policy of status determination without standards establishing. The outcome of such policy is Ahtissari's Plan for supervised Independence of Kosovo, and finally the Declaration of Self-proclaimed Independence of Kosovo. We are also witnessing the transfer of horizontal and vertical effective state authorizations to the mentioned international organizations, bearing in mind problems it encounters. NATO deals with security issues, but European Union being unable to deal with such tasks (ESDP policy is to be as attempt), is more concentrated on economic issues.
У теорији постоји сагласност да тероризам представља политички мотивисано насиље и да у том смислу представља један од облика насилне политичке борбе. Специфична разлика тероризма у односу на друге облике политичког насиља је примарна усмереност ка стварању, одржавању и експлоатацији страха ради застрашивања противника и јачања подршке међу присталицама. Суштинска одступања од теоријских и правних критеријума при одређивању тероризма постоје у пракси Савета безбедности. Општа оцена деловања Савета безбедности приликом доношења резолуција о тероризму јесте да прати владајући политички дискурс у коме су најпре државе биле одговорне за тероризам, да би потом "слабе", "неодговорне" и "репресивне" државе биле одговорне за омогућавање деловања међународних терористичких организација на својој територији. Савет безбедности усвајао је резолуције у којима је терористичке акте одређивао спрам природе акта, али и спрам извршиоца чиме су сви акти претходно одређене терористичке организације квалификовани као терористички акти. Истраживањем је утврђено и да је приликом усвајања појединих резолуција политичка сврсисходност утицала да се истоврсна понашања не квалификују увек као терористички акти. На основу изведених закључака утврђено је да сложеност борбе против тероризма представља последицу првенства политичке сврсисходности при квалификовању акта насиља као терористичког акта, а не због тешкоћа у дефинисању тероризма. Промене у концепцији тероризма у резолуцијама Савета безбедности и њихова усклађеност са владајућим јавним дискурсом одвијају се истовремено са настојањем САД и других западних држава да преобликују међународну заједницу и успоставе нови светски поредак. У таквим околностима тероризам почиње да егзистира као офанзивно политичко средство хибридног ратовања, при чему се негативна конотација тероризма експлоатише на два начина. Прво, тероризам постаје политичка оцена нечијег деловања без обзира на природу тако означене активности. Друго, тероризам се употребљава као насилно политичко средство које, у зависности од интереса онога ко цени одређено понашање, неће у свакој ситуацији бити означено као тероризам, већ понекад и као легитиман облик политичке акције. Офанзивни карактер одлуке истовремено води занемаривању научних критеријума у корист политичке сврсисходности при квалификацији неког понашања као терористичког акта. Доминација политичког критеријума при квалификовању терористичког акта утиче на инструментализацију тероризма и његово претварање у ефикасно средство хибридног ратовања. Садржај хибридног ратовања није последица неограниченог избора средстава односно оружја нити њихове софистицираности, већ способности безбедносног менаџмента да у свакој конкретној ситуацији независно од организационог нивоа примени такву комбинацију различитих, али међусобно компатибилних појединачних начина ратовања којом се остварује синергијски ефекат ради реализације претходно постављеног циља. Управо због тога тероризам као облик сложеног политичког насиља постаје предмет експлоатације у сврху хибридног ратовања. На основу резултата истраживања описана су три модела експлотације тероризма у сврху хибридног ратовања. Први модел експлоатације тероризма изведен је из политичке праксе САД да државе за које САД сматрају да користе тероризам као политичко средство ставе на Листу спонзора тероризма. Имајући у виду политички и сваки други утицај који САД имају, овакава пракса и њене последице формално или неформално су прихваћене широм света. Основне последице стављања на Листу спонзора тероризма су санкције, дискредитација у међународној јавности и легитимисање мера против таквих држава, док се у исто време таквом праксом врши притисак на државе које нису на Листи да ускладе своју политику са интересима великих сила. Други модел експлоатације тероризма у сврху хибридног ратовања манифестује се кроз организовање, финансирање, опремање, обуку и усмеравање сурогат снага против влада држава са којима није остварена компатибилност интереса, при чему су сурогат снаге представљене у јавном дискурсу као борци за слободу. Предмет експлоатације у Другом моделу јесте насиље које испуњава теоријске критеријуме да буде означено као тероризам, али је због политичке сврсисходности квалификовано као борба за слободу, отпор против угњетавања и сл. Експлоатација насиља у Другом моделу врши се у циљу промене носилаца политичке власти, стварање аутономних регија односно држава које би биле кооперативне са политиком државе која примењује Други модел или као део шире стратегије управљања безбедносним процесима. Трећи модел експлоатације тероризма у сврху хибридног ратовања подразумева организовање и управљање сурогат снагама које су квалификоване као терористичке организације или се врши инфилтрација појединаца у изворне и самосталне народне побуне ради преузимања руководећих места и управљања њиховим деловањем у складу са интересима државе која предузима Трећи модел. Предмет експлоатације у Трећем моделу јесте насиље које је квалификовано као тероризам, при чему је циљ експлоатације вишеструк: 1. Путем насиља и страха који настаје као последица вршења терористичких аката управља се безбедносном ситуацијом у држави која је мета агресије или у региону који је потребно политички и територијално контролисати, са или без физичког присуства оружаних снага државе која примењује Трећи модел; 2. Стварање страха код одређеног или унапред неодређеног броја држава од потенцијалних напада терористичких организација ради вршења латентног политичког притиска на државе да буде кооперативне, и 3. Стварање разлога за војну интервенцију ради присуства и политичке контроле одређене државе или региона. На основу претходно изнетих резултата истраживања изведен је закључак да први корак у спречавању експлоатације тероризма против наше државе представља отклањање или смањивање потенцијала за друштвене сукобе који настаје услед стварања или продубљивања друштвених противречности. Из тог разлога извршена је анализа нормативно – политичког и институционалног оквира у релевантним областима друштвеног живота. Истраживањем је утврђено да у Републици Србији постоји добар основ за ангажовање и интегрисање свих ресурса друштвене моћи на плану остваривања националне безбедности, али и да постоји потреба да се актуелни политички и безбедносни институционални оквир усклади са таквим могућностима. Као резултат истраживања предложене су три групе мера чија примена треба за резултат да има: отклањање и смањивање опасности од стварања потенцијала за друштвене сукобе; успостављање ефикасног и интегрисаног институционалног оквира за супротстављање политичком насиљу које евентуално проистекне из постојећих противречности и отклањање и смањивање штетних последица таквог политичког насиља. ; U teoriji postoji saglasnost da terorizam predstavlja politički motivisano nasilje i da u tom smislu predstavlja jedan od oblika nasilne političke borbe. Specifična razlika terorizma u odnosu na druge oblike političkog nasilja je primarna usmerenost ka stvaranju, održavanju i eksploataciji straha radi zastrašivanja protivnika i jačanja podrške među pristalicama. Suštinska odstupanja od teorijskih i pravnih kriterijuma pri određivanju terorizma postoje u praksi Saveta bezbednosti. Opšta ocena delovanja Saveta bezbednosti prilikom donošenja rezolucija o terorizmu jeste da prati vladajući politički diskurs u kome su najpre države bile odgovorne za terorizam, da bi potom "slabe", "neodgovorne" i "represivne" države bile odgovorne za omogućavanje delovanja međunarodnih terorističkih organizacija na svojoj teritoriji. Savet bezbednosti usvajao je rezolucije u kojima je terorističke akte određivao spram prirode akta, ali i spram izvršioca čime su svi akti prethodno određene terorističke organizacije kvalifikovani kao teroristički akti. Istraživanjem je utvrđeno i da je prilikom usvajanja pojedinih rezolucija politička svrsishodnost uticala da se istovrsna ponašanja ne kvalifikuju uvek kao teroristički akti. Na osnovu izvedenih zaključaka utvrđeno je da složenost borbe protiv terorizma predstavlja posledicu prvenstva političke svrsishodnosti pri kvalifikovanju akta nasilja kao terorističkog akta, a ne zbog teškoća u definisanju terorizma. Promene u koncepciji terorizma u rezolucijama Saveta bezbednosti i njihova usklađenost sa vladajućim javnim diskursom odvijaju se istovremeno sa nastojanjem SAD i drugih zapadnih država da preoblikuju međunarodnu zajednicu i uspostave novi svetski poredak. U takvim okolnostima terorizam počinje da egzistira kao ofanzivno političko sredstvo hibridnog ratovanja, pri čemu se negativna konotacija terorizma eksploatiše na dva načina. Prvo, terorizam postaje politička ocena nečijeg delovanja bez obzira na prirodu tako označene aktivnosti. Drugo, terorizam se upotrebljava kao nasilno političko sredstvo koje, u zavisnosti od interesa onoga ko ceni određeno ponašanje, neće u svakoj situaciji biti označeno kao terorizam, već ponekad i kao legitiman oblik političke akcije. Ofanzivni karakter odluke istovremeno vodi zanemarivanju naučnih kriterijuma u korist političke svrsishodnosti pri kvalifikaciji nekog ponašanja kao terorističkog akta. Dominacija političkog kriterijuma pri kvalifikovanju terorističkog akta utiče na instrumentalizaciju terorizma i njegovo pretvaranje u efikasno sredstvo hibridnog ratovanja. Sadržaj hibridnog ratovanja nije posledica neograničenog izbora sredstava odnosno oružja niti njihove sofisticiranosti, već sposobnosti bezbednosnog menadžmenta da u svakoj konkretnoj situaciji nezavisno od organizacionog nivoa primeni takvu kombinaciju različitih, ali međusobno kompatibilnih pojedinačnih načina ratovanja kojom se ostvaruje sinergijski efekat radi realizacije prethodno postavljenog cilja. Upravo zbog toga terorizam kao oblik složenog političkog nasilja postaje predmet eksploatacije u svrhu hibridnog ratovanja. Na osnovu rezultata istraživanja opisana su tri modela eksplotacije terorizma u svrhu hibridnog ratovanja. Prvi model eksploatacije terorizma izveden je iz političke prakse SAD da države za koje SAD smatraju da koriste terorizam kao političko sredstvo stave na Listu sponzora terorizma. Imajući u vidu politički i svaki drugi uticaj koji SAD imaju, ovakava praksa i njene posledice formalno ili neformalno su prihvaćene širom sveta. Osnovne posledice stavljanja na Listu sponzora terorizma su sankcije, diskreditacija u međunarodnoj javnosti i legitimisanje mera protiv takvih država, dok se u isto vreme takvom praksom vrši pritisak na države koje nisu na Listi da usklade svoju politiku sa interesima velikih sila. Drugi model eksploatacije terorizma u svrhu hibridnog ratovanja manifestuje se kroz organizovanje, finansiranje, opremanje, obuku i usmeravanje surogat snaga protiv vlada država sa kojima nije ostvarena kompatibilnost interesa, pri čemu su surogat snage predstavljene u javnom diskursu kao borci za slobodu. Predmet eksploatacije u Drugom modelu jeste nasilje koje ispunjava teorijske kriterijume da bude označeno kao terorizam, ali je zbog političke svrsishodnosti kvalifikovano kao borba za slobodu, otpor protiv ugnjetavanja i sl. Eksploatacija nasilja u Drugom modelu vrši se u cilju promene nosilaca političke vlasti, stvaranje autonomnih regija odnosno država koje bi bile kooperativne sa politikom države koja primenjuje Drugi model ili kao deo šire strategije upravljanja bezbednosnim procesima. Treći model eksploatacije terorizma u svrhu hibridnog ratovanja podrazumeva organizovanje i upravljanje surogat snagama koje su kvalifikovane kao terorističke organizacije ili se vrši infiltracija pojedinaca u izvorne i samostalne narodne pobune radi preuzimanja rukovodećih mesta i upravljanja njihovim delovanjem u skladu sa interesima države koja preduzima Treći model. Predmet eksploatacije u Trećem modelu jeste nasilje koje je kvalifikovano kao terorizam, pri čemu je cilj eksploatacije višestruk: 1. Putem nasilja i straha koji nastaje kao posledica vršenja terorističkih akata upravlja se bezbednosnom situacijom u državi koja je meta agresije ili u regionu koji je potrebno politički i teritorijalno kontrolisati, sa ili bez fizičkog prisustva oružanih snaga države koja primenjuje Treći model; 2. Stvaranje straha kod određenog ili unapred neodređenog broja država od potencijalnih napada terorističkih organizacija radi vršenja latentnog političkog pritiska na države da bude kooperativne, i 3. Stvaranje razloga za vojnu intervenciju radi prisustva i političke kontrole određene države ili regiona. Na osnovu prethodno iznetih rezultata istraživanja izveden je zaključak da prvi korak u sprečavanju eksploatacije terorizma protiv naše države predstavlja otklanjanje ili smanjivanje potencijala za društvene sukobe koji nastaje usled stvaranja ili produbljivanja društvenih protivrečnosti. Iz tog razloga izvršena je analiza normativno – političkog i institucionalnog okvira u relevantnim oblastima društvenog života. Istraživanjem je utvrđeno da u Republici Srbiji postoji dobar osnov za angažovanje i integrisanje svih resursa društvene moći na planu ostvarivanja nacionalne bezbednosti, ali i da postoji potreba da se aktuelni politički i bezbednosni institucionalni okvir uskladi sa takvim mogućnostima. Kao rezultat istraživanja predložene su tri grupe mera čija primena treba za rezultat da ima: otklanjanje i smanjivanje opasnosti od stvaranja potencijala za društvene sukobe; uspostavljanje efikasnog i integrisanog institucionalnog okvira za suprotstavljanje političkom nasilju koje eventualno proistekne iz postojećih protivrečnosti i otklanjanje i smanjivanje štetnih posledica takvog političkog nasilja. ; There is a consensus in security studies that terrorism is a politically motivated violence and, therefore, it represents one of the forms of violent political struggle. What distinguishes terrorism from other forms of political violence is its primary focus on creating, maintaining and exploiting fear in order to intimidate opponents and strengthen support among allies. Fundamental deviations from theoretical and legal criteria in determination of terrorism are identified in the pratice of the Security Council. The general assessment of the Security Council's actions related to terrorism is that the Council has been following the prevailing political discourse in which, initially, states in their entirety were responsible for terrorism, and later the blame was put on "weak", "irresponsible" and "repressive" states for enabling international terrorist organizations to operate on their territories. The Security Council passed resolutions in which it classified terrorist acts according to the nature of the act but also to the nature of the perpetrator, which resulted in treating all acts of a previously designated terrorist organization as terrorist acts. The research also determined that during the adoption of certain resolutions, political expediency influenced the fact that similar behaviors do not always qualify as terrorist acts. Based on the previously derived conclusions, it could be said that the complexity of fight against terrorism is a consequence of the primacy of the political criterion in designation of an act of violence as a terrorist act, and not because of the difficulties in defining the notion of terrorism. Changes in the concept of terrorism in the Security Council Resolutions and their harmonization with the prevailing public discourse coincides with the efforts of the United States and other Western countries to reshape the international community and establish a new world order. In such circumstances, terrorism becomes an offensive political tool of hybrid warfare, with the negative connotation of terrorism being exploited in two ways. First, terrorism has become a political assessment of one's actions, regardless of the nature of the such activities. Second, terrorism has become a violent political tool which, depending on the interests of those in the position to evaluate certain behaviors, will not be labeled as terrorism in each situation, but rather as a legitimate form of political action at times. Offensive character of the decision leads to the neglect of scientific criteria in favor of political expediency in the process of terrorist act designation. Dominance of the political criterion in designation of a terrorist act influences the instrumentalisation of terrorism and its transformation into an effective means of hybrid warfare. Content of hybrid warfare is not a consequence of an unlimited variety of weapons used, nor their sophistication, but the ability of security management to apply such combinations of different, yet mutually compatible types of warfare in order to achieve a previously determined aim. These are reasons why terrorism, as a form of complex political violence, is exploited in hybrid warfare. Based on the results of the research, three models of exploitation of terrorism for the purposes of hybrid warfare are described. The First Model of exploitation is derived from the political practice of the United States to put countries on the U.S list of state sponsors of terrorism. In accordance with the political and any other influence that the United States has, this practice and its consequences are formally or informally accepted around the world. The main consequences of being placed on the List are sanctions, discredit on the international level and legitimization of measures against such states, while at the same time putting pressure on countries that are not on the List to harmonize their policies with the interests of great powers. The Second Model of exploitation of terrorism for the purpose of hybrid warfare consists of organizing, financing, equipping, training and directing surrogate forces against the governments of countries with whom compatibility of interests has not been achieved, where surrogate forces are presented in the public discourse as freedom fighters. The subject of exploitation in the Second Model is violence that meets the theoretical criteria to be designated as terrorism. However, due to its political expediency it is qualified as a fight for freedom, resistance against oppression etc. The exploitation of violence used in the second model is done with the intention of shifting political power in order to create autonomous regions or states that would be cooperative with the policy of the state that applies the Second Model or as a part of a broader strategy for managing security processes. The Third Model of exploitation of terrorism for the purposes of hybrid warfare implies organization and managing of surrogate forces that are qualified as terrorist organizations or infiltrating individuals into original and independent popular uprisings in order to take leadership positions and manage their actions in accordance with the interests of the state which apply the Third Model. The subject of exploitation in the Third Model is violence that is qualified as terrorism, with multiple goals: 1. Violence and fear that arises as a result of terrorist acts allows crisis management in the country targeted by aggression or in the region in need of political and territorial control, with or without the physical presence of the armed forces of the State applying the Third Model; 2. Creating fear of potential terrorist attacks in order to exert latent political pressure on states to be cooperative, and 3. Creating reasons for a military intervention which results in physical presence and political control of a certain state or region. Based on the previously presented research results, it may be concluded that the first step to prevent terrorist exploitation against our country should be to eliminate or reduce the potential for social conflicts driven by social contradictions. For this reason, an analysis of the normative - political and institutional framework in the relevant areas of social life was conducted. The research has determined that in the Republic of Serbia there is a good basis for engaging and integrating all resources of national power in terms of achieving national security. In addition, there is a need to harmonize the current political and institutional framework for national security with such possibilities. As a result of the research, three groups of measures have been proposed: elimination or reduction of the potential for social conflicts; establishment of an effective and integrated institutional framework for countering political violence that may arise from the aforementioned contradictions, and elimination and reduction of harmful consequences of such political violence.
